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
87
88
89
90
|
Return-Path: <thomasv@electrum.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF11D1BB
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 08:56:31 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mrelay2-d.mail.gandi.net (relay2-d.mail.gandi.net
[217.70.183.194])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 865AD11E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 08:56:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mfilter34-d.gandi.net (mfilter34-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.165])
by mrelay2-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F214DC5A55
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 10:56:29 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mfilter34-d.gandi.net
Received: from mrelay2-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.194])
by mfilter34-d.gandi.net (mfilter34-d.gandi.net [10.0.15.180])
(amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ND833fqwp9If
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 10:56:28 +0200 (CEST)
X-Originating-IP: 94.223.107.254
Received: from [192.168.2.153]
(dslb-094-223-107-254.094.223.pools.vodafone-ip.de [94.223.107.254])
(Authenticated sender: thomasv@electrum.org)
by mrelay2-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 87187C5A5F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 20 Jul 2015 10:56:28 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <55ACB7BB.2020200@electrum.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 10:56:27 +0200
From: Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv@electrum.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <CABqynx+YAgt404zXAqwq9_AjvmX6J0=vBi=xK_56AdsR8nMF+A@mail.gmail.com> <55AA54C3.7010806@electrum.org>
<CABqynx+X9j3UviQGp-Vaf77gKM9TAJZxnWkfA3DgmSELxu1RhQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABqynx+X9j3UviQGp-Vaf77gKM9TAJZxnWkfA3DgmSELxu1RhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal: extend bip70 with OpenAlias
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: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 08:56:32 -0000
Le 19/07/2015 01:01, Justin Newton via bitcoin-dev a =C3=A9crit :
>>
>> I would rather not make Namecoin part of the standard, because .bit
>> records cannot be verified easily by lightweight/spv wallets; they wou=
ld
>> need a copy of the Namecoin blockchain for that.
>=20
> You are the second person to raise this. Clearly this is an item that
> requires some discussion before anything is decided for sure. We had
> gone this direction (and I assume Riccardo did as well) to provide a
> censor resistant option as well as one that would be low cost for
> individuals to be able register their own names. This also allows for
> lookups that never leave the local network. The trade off there for
> mobile wallets was one I feel we failed to properly consider.
>=20
I think our common goal should be to standardize DNS records holding
Bitcoin addresses, because they are going to be used by both Netki and
Electrum.
You and Ricardo may find it useful to have other types of lookups, such
as Namecoin, and that's fine with me, but I do not want that to slow
down or stall the current standardisation effort, because Namecoin
lookups are clearly not an option for lightweight wallets. That is what
I meant by 'not part of the standard'; let's work on what we have in
common :)
|
