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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1QlazH-0000KK-6h
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 26 Jul 2011 06:19:27 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1QlazC-0005RD-43 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 26 Jul 2011 06:19:27 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (fl-67-77-87-241.dhcp.embarqhsd.net
[67.77.87.241]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAE07D707D8;
Tue, 26 Jul 2011 06:19:13 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: Rick Wesson <rick@support-intelligence.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 02:18:56 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.39-gentoo; KDE/4.6.4; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAJ1JLts5_r6hHoJR-gS-CuuvS00p=RQ6iYbCyOkBDcvgs1xtew@mail.gmail.com>
<201107260022.24961.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAJ1JLttnARz=f0UmzJKpCXpMeKg1X_R7Jfwv7tZq_pJqn8LbQQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ1JLttnARz=f0UmzJKpCXpMeKg1X_R7Jfwv7tZq_pJqn8LbQQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: CE5A D56A 36CC 69FA E7D2 3558 665F C11D D53E 9583
X-PGP-Key-ID: 665FC11DD53E9583
X-PGP-Keyserver: x-hkp://subkeys.pgp.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201107260218.59313.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.2 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain 0.5 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1QlazC-0005RD-43
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] bitcoin DNS addresses
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: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 06:19:27 -0000
On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 12:54:23 AM Rick Wesson wrote:
> > 1. Right now you practically need a unique Bitcoin address per
> > transaction.
>
> I'd like to find ways to alievate this requirement.
Admittedly, my proposal to email a signed message allows one to reuse
addresses, but there is still a privacy concern.
> > 2. DNSSEC is on the edge of becoming illegal in the US.
>
> really, pointers please. DHS was a huge funder for DNSSEC asn .mil was
> the first domain to deploy it. I think you may be miss-informed.
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22PROTECT+IP+act%22+DNSSEC
> > 3. Emails aren't merely domains.
>
> correct, I was speaking about an "address" that used the same/simular
> formatting but did not use the SMTP protocol.
I only meant that foo.bar.net is not the same formatting.
foo@bar.net would be.
|
