1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1R5hAp-0006XK-9c
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:58:27 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.161.47 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.161.47; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
helo=mail-fx0-f47.google.com;
Received: from mail-fx0-f47.google.com ([209.85.161.47])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1R5hAo-0001tR-Cl
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:58:27 +0000
Received: by fxi1 with SMTP id 1so5806149fxi.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:58:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.61.66 with SMTP id s2mr5369058fah.27.1316451478462; Mon,
19 Sep 2011 09:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.152.25.105 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <21269.192.251.226.206.1316448084.squirrel@lavabit.com>
References: <201109182104.45994.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAL0fb61B6bqGMhWtCgvy0xwfHQ_nvmhbb9uLJQWx3biENhVJNw@mail.gmail.com>
<21269.192.251.226.206.1316448084.squirrel@lavabit.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 12:57:58 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T0y601kjJ7ToczwhcQUoh3NZbuPa+iWwtm6-DZxZSRNPg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gavinandresen[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
0.0 T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL To: misformatted and free email service
-0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1R5hAo-0001tR-Cl
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin Enhancement Proposals (BEPS)
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:58:27 -0000
New 'standard' transaction forms would be perfect candidates for BEPS.
I think we aught to have a formal proposal to separate the protocol
version from the client version, too.
--
Does anybody besides me think maybe we should name them something
other than "BEP" ?
I'm worried we'll regret it in two years when a google for "BEP003"
takes you to the BitTorrent EPs instead of the BitCoin EPs.
Maybe "BIP" == Bitcoin Improvement Proposal
or "PEB" == Proposal to Enhance Bitcoin
or "BER" == Bitcoin Enhancement Request
I think I like "BIP" (PEB sounds like a diet soda, and I don't know
if BER should be pronounced "bear" or "beer").
I generally don't care about names, but it seems like a little
planning now might save some confusion later. And I don't want the
BitTorrent folks to get pissed off at us for 'stealing' their acronym,
either.
--
--
Gavin Andresen
|
