Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9283F279 for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 13:07:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F32E516F for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 13:06:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wibhh20 with SMTP id hh20so149923054wib.0 for ; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 06:06:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=5btxlI77gsXczo6B/fReCo79gya79OTB0aHkSQmn8vM=; b=TRAsVCZeLWs4GYgvVrx4jTloGnf689Zg1QR575qumBcBDapATBj/PjZIN7t3qov4NZ kYT17XXsO9g3UXfo6Z0b61/1EGllDaiuOAphGBWdgZwM0zktmMyc9NzL1F3OsYI4E162 LZV+cWd21EdBJSxZGDDt0aUNIe+HS/ougWWdPp50LlwWHP490V11rJvDt/Ja3Vsb/EwL /GZ1iKLv0QnkEF4KIPXHcq7kx+TOP3zzM2bHu2TAvMo/TEsVv9vFydWllOFtdzqhOTIY RK3T+okK0oyKbsnUanagkRUf+z+7Mzwn4QO7IHejA1DkqM7jHmFXruirlyddbOrOY0Z5 hokA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn1NDsppFdwgIKX4YtErjp8WF6GojegGDh9b6HRxzAwpPZiZoOtwhCziCIg78woXHJFUE0U MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.181.13.195 with SMTP id fa3mr24486030wid.7.1439212011365; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 06:06:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.31.230 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 06:06:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <55C75FC8.6070807@jrn.me.uk> <55C77E80.3060203@jrn.me.uk> Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 15:06:51 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= To: Mike Hearn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Alternative chain support for payment protocol X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 13:07:03 -0000 On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: > We're not modifying BIP 70, it's now immutable and can only be extended. Well, yes, I guess it's modifying that in the extension BIP. > There's really not much point in having a dedicated chain ID for regtest > mode. You shouldn't be finding BIP70 requests for regtest outside of your > own developer machine, where the id doesn't matter. The point is not having exceptions and treating all supported chains in the same way in the code. Having a special case for regtest makes the code more complex, not simpler.