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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1YVn3G-00088M-JX
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 11 Mar 2015 20:16:22 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.223.170 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.223.170; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ie0-f170.google.com;
Received: from mail-ie0-f170.google.com ([209.85.223.170])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YVn3D-0000zK-OC
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 11 Mar 2015 20:16:22 +0000
Received: by iecvj10 with SMTP id vj10so4485707iec.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:16:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.7.1 with SMTP id f1mr67699505iga.8.1426104974447; Wed, 11
Mar 2015 13:16:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.6.133 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55002AD9.2060006@thomaskerin.io>
References: <55002AD9.2060006@thomaskerin.io>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 20:16:13 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgR_nA5p+6+wgJGLddxjswxdqqzOsPg5=s0GNEiEAYFxnQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Kerin <me@thomaskerin.io>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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
(gmaxwell[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
X-Headers-End: 1YVn3D-0000zK-OC
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for standard multi-signature P2SH
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: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 20:16:22 -0000
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Thomas Kerin <me@thomaskerin.io> wrote:
> I used BIP0090 as a place-holder, but I would like to request a BIP number
> for this now.
We have had repeated problems in the past with people working on and
circulating prior draft proposals squatting on each others numbers,
and each demanding access to the same numbers. As a matter of
procedure I will not assign squatted numbers, but also discussion
should come in advance of number assignment; general subject here
seems reasonable but many proposals are withdrawn by the party
tendering them after further discussion shows the effort to be without
public interest or actually subsumed by other functionality. :)
Proposals should not be called "BIP[nn]" until they're actually a BIP.
Feel free to call it bip-kerin-multisignature or any other
placeholder name that won't be confused with a finished BIP for
drafting.
If there is any public documentation on the process which caused you
specific confusion, please feel free to point me at it and I'll be
sure to fix it! Sorry for any confusion there.
|
