path: root/2d/f100cbe8bc173b459658f71f7f477d1cc8aa67

Return-Path: <keatonatron@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A45AB5D
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 17 Mar 2016 01:23:21 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-oi0-f53.google.com (mail-oi0-f53.google.com
	[209.85.218.53])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 277C319E
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 17 Mar 2016 01:23:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oi0-f53.google.com with SMTP id m82so52402613oif.1
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Wed, 16 Mar 2016 18:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; 
	bh=YdCDsYHl4fLFDr8OLrlj8vUUxqGLaS90ym4gwKuKzpI=;
	b=oNZ4FE/M3noz+mMCbAaoDWC5lj3IuLGkUoIq/91dT/0kKJ0mD2M3PE8OxPl316mU7c
	otKPjLDXr7lMi83wGcNA99dD9xagf3Jibfj/8QJLH846BLk/cCoLTOiY3roVFy9jrcpj
	ShqmPkXS5Mit4nJ34UrEaUq285rRu4YQFzplAGuD30PX5oBuAaGo6RkTlphUa+Xlj4Pb
	BJa690OYFIfTo4ziZBTtPy8LuokBvo+t6LfFN3a5EsN6z2wLg5G+kCXq0mlX3KVRh/Zf
	eC7CkZpQ4Y9Dmvv3YMZBs1+Fe6PjvS60eBRAeq7HFBH91hDvS03v1/cE7Cwlbxvf9zbQ
	jTpQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to;
	bh=YdCDsYHl4fLFDr8OLrlj8vUUxqGLaS90ym4gwKuKzpI=;
	b=OEvwubEJ8ELmicV2cUQaeesFx5KYUUOG0UiT25Ud6T6BZk93j+6fvF81Lwl9t3I1hw
	jckRo0KeJw7yLGKcIKj1dh8eVCgZFZGj/Euj3AbB/XjNEp/bsCpdWrWI/hIQ6wjsiu6T
	pjCtMJbFT9iZe2709t7ov/YN1iqUFM5+7skiUiBwxqSJu2OKPxHSLre5RX1jQPpetR9C
	xHkYWFxYgwQ0I76RwhxhjupN2FFqMp3qD25zSdX6lV+CKDkEhvbM3ffkcckc7HumluEM
	wJGakgoqGn5yuYXSoqXnE8fGqBugUqrE03caOlM9JjSR2vCJkefM8BsEh6SSc5jwNG97
	zCPw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIy9IMBxI/ZpfngLzfq91UyO0BhX6M3eFVAY/SP1b1WRT+9kd6p8m80qf38DcX2UqzYGnk6EB905NjFFA==
X-Received: by 10.202.90.3 with SMTP id o3mr4376354oib.96.1458177799343; Wed,
	16 Mar 2016 18:23:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAH+Axy6WVtb8Eib0aqS4Pp=zpjnsrDBbWRMmmBrJOZ3rFQAXww@mail.gmail.com>
	<nbublk$d1f$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<CABqynxK+bdh=6_RbE0c4KXwrTz=f47Ddn=C-iTSEMwZKBPUQdA@mail.gmail.com>
	<nc1at9$8gi$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <nc1at9$8gi$1@ger.gmane.org>
From: James MacWhyte <macwhyte@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 01:23:09 +0000
Message-ID: <CAH+Axy6R5m2DTOpm=-u8kUf8LhwUEkPMJinST-5cATa2zVXxxg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>,
	bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d5edcbff874052e34793a
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 01:23:41 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP75 - Out of Band Address Exchange
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 01:23:21 -0000

--001a113d5edcbff874052e34793a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

We have removed the BIP70 field extensions from this BIP and will save that
for another time. A PR to add our documentation to the main repo has been
submitted.

James

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:36 AM Andreas Schildbach via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Replying to the "fee" part of BIP75 (which as already noted should go to
> a different BIP number imho):
>
> It makes to sense to let the payee define a fee *rate*. The payee
> doesn't know anything about how the payer's wallet is structured. In
> extreme cases, as a payer I would keep all my tiny UTXOs (which would be
> unspendable in a economic way) for the one payee who is willing to pay a
> high enough rate...
>
> Rather, I propose an absolute amount that the payee is willing to cover
> should be declared.
>
> Also, in order to avoid disputes I suggest the amount should be deducted
> from the BIP70 payment message amount already. A wallet which
> understands BIP75fee would add these two up for *display* puposes only.
> The wallet should continue to use the existing fee policies. If it can
> send the amount as specified by BIP70 and the fee is below the BIP75fee
> amount, it would not mention any fees to the user. If it exceeds, it
> would display just the exceeding amount.
>
>
>
>
> On 03/11/2016 11:43 PM, Justin Newton via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > I think we would be open to either leaving them in, or doing a separate
> > BIP.  What do others think?  I=E2=80=99d prefer to keep them together i=
f the
> > changes are non-controversial just to cut down on #of BIP=E2=80=99s, bu=
t thats
> > not a strong preference.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 3:54 AM, Andreas Schildbach via bitcoin-dev
> > <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     I think it's a bad idea to pollute the original idea of this BIP wi=
th
> >     other extensions. Other extensions should go to separate BIPs,
> >     especially since methods to clarify the fee have nothing to do with
> >     secure and authenticated bi-directional BIP70 communication.
> >
> >
> >     On 03/10/2016 10:43 PM, James MacWhyte via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> >     > Hi everyone,
> >     >
> >     > Our BIP (officially proposed on March 1) has tentatively been
> assigned
> >     > number 75. Also, the title has been changed to "Out of Band Addre=
ss
> >     > Exchange using Payment Protocol Encryption" to be more accurate.
> >     >
> >     > We thought it would be good to take this opportunity to add some
> >     > optional fields to the BIP70 paymentDetails message. The new
> >     fields are:
> >     > subtractable fee (give permission to the sender to use some of th=
e
> >     > requested amount towards the transaction fee), fee per kb (the
> minimum
> >     > fee required to be accepted as zeroconf), and replace by fee
> >     (whether or
> >     > not a transaction with the RBF flag will be accepted with
> zeroconf). I
> >     > know it doesn't make much sense for merchants to accept RBF with
> >     > zeroconf, so that last one might be used more to explicitly refus=
e
> RBF
> >     > transactions (and allow the automation of choosing a setting base=
d
> on
> >     > who you are transacting with).
> >     >
> >     > I see BIP75 as a general modernization of BIP70, so I think it
> >     should be
> >     > fine to include these extensions in the new BIP, even though thes=
e
> >     > fields are not specific to the features we are proposing. Please
> >     take a
> >     > look at the relevant section and let me know if anyone has any
> >     concerns:
> >     >
> >
> https://github.com/techguy613/bips/blob/master/bip-0075.mediawiki#Extendi=
ng_BIP70_PaymentDetails
> >     >
> >     > The BIP70 extensions page in our fork has also been updated.
> >     >
> >     > Thanks!
> >     >
> >     > James
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > _______________________________________________
> >     > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> >     > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> >     <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> >     > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >     >
> >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     bitcoin-dev mailing list
> >     bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> >     <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> >     https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Justin W. Newton
> > Founder/CEO
> > Netki, Inc.
> >
> > justin@netki.com <mailto:justin@netki.com>
> > +1.818.261.4248 <tel:+1.818.261.4248>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--001a113d5edcbff874052e34793a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">We have removed the BIP70 field extensions from this BIP a=
nd will save that for another time. A PR to add our documentation to the ma=
in repo has been submitted.<div><br></div><div>James</div></div><br><div cl=
ass=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:36 AM Andrea=
s Schildbach via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxf=
oundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></di=
v><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:=
1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Replying to the &quot;fee&quot; part of BI=
P75 (which as already noted should go to<br>
a different BIP number imho):<br>
<br>
It makes to sense to let the payee define a fee *rate*. The payee<br>
doesn&#39;t know anything about how the payer&#39;s wallet is structured. I=
n<br>
extreme cases, as a payer I would keep all my tiny UTXOs (which would be<br=
>
unspendable in a economic way) for the one payee who is willing to pay a<br=
>
high enough rate...<br>
<br>
Rather, I propose an absolute amount that the payee is willing to cover<br>
should be declared.<br>
<br>
Also, in order to avoid disputes I suggest the amount should be deducted<br=
>
from the BIP70 payment message amount already. A wallet which<br>
understands BIP75fee would add these two up for *display* puposes only.<br>
The wallet should continue to use the existing fee policies. If it can<br>
send the amount as specified by BIP70 and the fee is below the BIP75fee<br>
amount, it would not mention any fees to the user. If it exceeds, it<br>
would display just the exceeding amount.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 03/11/2016 11:43 PM, Justin Newton via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
&gt; I think we would be open to either leaving them in, or doing a separat=
e<br>
&gt; BIP.=C2=A0 What do others think?=C2=A0 I=E2=80=99d prefer to keep them=
 together if the<br>
&gt; changes are non-controversial just to cut down on #of BIP=E2=80=99s, b=
ut thats<br>
&gt; not a strong preference.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 3:54 AM, Andreas Schildbach via bitcoin-dev<br=
>
&gt; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D=
"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
&gt; &lt;mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;&gt; wrote:<br=
>
&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I think it&#39;s a bad idea to pollute the original=
 idea of this BIP with<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0other extensions. Other extensions should go to sep=
arate BIPs,<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0especially since methods to clarify the fee have no=
thing to do with<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0secure and authenticated bi-directional BIP70 commu=
nication.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0On 03/10/2016 10:43 PM, James MacWhyte via bitcoin-=
dev wrote:<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; Hi everyone,<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; Our BIP (officially proposed on March 1) has t=
entatively been assigned<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; number 75. Also, the title has been changed to=
 &quot;Out of Band Address<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; Exchange using Payment Protocol Encryption&quo=
t; to be more accurate.<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; We thought it would be good to take this oppor=
tunity to add some<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; optional fields to the BIP70 paymentDetails me=
ssage. The new<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0fields are:<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; subtractable fee (give permission to the sende=
r to use some of the<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; requested amount towards the transaction fee),=
 fee per kb (the minimum<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; fee required to be accepted as zeroconf), and =
replace by fee<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(whether or<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; not a transaction with the RBF flag will be ac=
cepted with zeroconf). I<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; know it doesn&#39;t make much sense for mercha=
nts to accept RBF with<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; zeroconf, so that last one might be used more =
to explicitly refuse RBF<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; transactions (and allow the automation of choo=
sing a setting based on<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; who you are transacting with).<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; I see BIP75 as a general modernization of BIP7=
0, so I think it<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0should be<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; fine to include these extensions in the new BI=
P, even though these<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; fields are not specific to the features we are=
 proposing. Please<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0take a<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; look at the relevant section and let me know i=
f anyone has any<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0concerns:<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://github.com/techguy613/bips/blob/=
master/bip-0075.mediawiki#Extending_BIP70_PaymentDetails" rel=3D"noreferrer=
" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/techguy613/bips/blob/master/bip-0075=
.mediawiki#Extending_BIP70_PaymentDetails</a><br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; The BIP70 extensions page in our fork has also=
 been updated.<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; Thanks!<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; James<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; ______________________________________________=
_<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfound=
ation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&lt;mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linu=
xfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a=
>&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt; <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/m=
ailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://l=
ists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0_______________________________________________<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation=
.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0&lt;mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linu=
xfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a=
>&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailma=
n/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.=
linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; --<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Justin W. Newton<br>
&gt; Founder/CEO<br>
&gt; Netki, Inc.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:justin@netki.com" target=3D"_blank">justin@netki.com=
</a> &lt;mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:justin@netki.com" target=3D"_blank">justi=
n@netki.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; +1.818.261.4248 &lt;tel:+1.818.261.4248&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; _______________________________________________<br>
&gt; bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
&gt; <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_bl=
ank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
&gt; <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-=
dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
&gt;<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>

--001a113d5edcbff874052e34793a--