summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/2d/02daeb2ac87292241b28e16983addae49a138e
blob: 174011d5c44ed26d71d07d355a920c28d9bc9df9 (plain)
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
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <jgarzik@bitpay.com>) id 1X6y1w-0004EH-2E
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:24:08 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
	designates 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=74.125.82.43; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
	helo=mail-wg0-f43.google.com; 
Received: from mail-wg0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43])
	by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1X6y1v-0003zB-3G
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:24:08 +0000
Received: by mail-wg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id l18so4483669wgh.14
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:24:00 -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:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=UvAFF0aU0OdnGRUPVILEPqKZKJ+aPM7z+2eVyxdKxCU=;
	b=i0oGIlZr+lwPjeeaqBf1G9IUfDNRJyfkFzsHB1e5RTyeQ/FhasDsBvTwW/nx8ChcmP
	jxfweHMlNGP+J+CwMXG8DBnK85IX0J/hmGqXs+lEqzwnjuZVFgP3La1keQwQ28hcKixK
	R8Vv1RFxjknny29MjARhCk2PzIyuNKjNaA+MOs90Kut/5fEdnPLm5BdgIxN81hM3Dsk8
	Kh8DfqXMitBx5Pdxq5BopJyU9znHF4FAAlHXN3Sa5flvzZNXli9Nj8xnMvyJEuayfUXK
	t7/hD+UBdTMjSbxCkEB6umbfc/+pE6OYsaMTIYpCkS8LDawbRkCRuVk6qJUD8oWC2b3X
	Iowg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl++odGShMvzaxCWcY+ZQBJDVGpMyYNg8k9MaxpsYtApZ7TM2vkgYhAHu+gdJuCdoNOcy/v
X-Received: by 10.194.186.178 with SMTP id fl18mr24791902wjc.83.1405412640790; 
	Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:24:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.5.67 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 01:23:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJCJ77FkRGzTNLxOaJifKWLeC2wJ5usYf571MVOOugtMRQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJHLa0M7iEUQnJ9M4A3ev3EQqxUVQG85qucRamvMb0n-CztOFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+s+GJCJ77FkRGzTNLxOaJifKWLeC2wJ5usYf571MVOOugtMRQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 04:23:40 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0OskyEbsEmhrUayshg56Cr_q_6O4edRmdM5jDh3Pb=WGA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
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 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: 1X6y1v-0003zB-3G
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin address TTL & key expiration?
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, 15 Jul 2014 08:24:08 -0000

On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 4:19 AM, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:
> In my opinion encouraging the use of the payment protocol and
> deprecating the use of addresses is the best way forward, and not just
> for this reason.

There are major gaps that the payment protocol doesn't cover.

There are several deployed use cases where you are provided/request an
address, an API provides one, and one or more incoming payments arrive
as the user sends them over minutes/hours/days/weeks.

-- 
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc.      https://bitpay.com/