Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.181 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.181; envelope-from=pieter.wuille@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f181.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP17xEKcPOvQEBuDs-JXaMtEuOcRp8UvH4dvVDc=PyyqsA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T0Ly67ZNJhoRQk0L9Q0-ucq3e=24b5Tg6GRKspRKKtP-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBhb3WOYnWRc020QbGwE0W4XeWWmXXTqYyAqrtB7h0+b8A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T0o2BN+UyZt-TYcEXX_U0ztP3Rq3+arr_2C1MPEtU_dUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP2+D4xu0t2efRPfg0t5gD8RRBk=KQEJH+0FF5J=vBmwiA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPg+sBheF45bsx5it-0v1QjDW--t5UkZZjNjf9wt3d7XgUXLgw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP17xEKcPOvQEBuDs-JXaMtEuOcRp8UvH4dvVDc=PyyqsA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 23:49:00 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBirjUdXu+kWnxpX9Shahf9dxBnGbMF+r75oduej7QFrmQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Payment Protocol: BIP 70, 71, 72
Precedence: list

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
>
>> My concerns here are:
>> * Making sure wallet applications can function without supporting the
>> P2P protocol (which drops a huge implementation overhead for simple -
>> perhaps hardware-based - wallets)
>
>
> How would such wallets get transactions into their wallet in the first
> place?

By connecting to some other client, presumably. Have a small hardware
client that is able to do payments via NFC/QR/... directly with a
merchant, and can get 'recharged' by connecting with your desktop
client, for example. Maybe too futuristic to be a concern, but it
nicely illustrates how doing direct sender-to-receiver negotiation can
help decoupling tasks.

> I don't really have a strong opinion either way, but doing more work to
> prevent transactions being announced to the network feels weird.

Ok.

-- 
Pieter