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
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1WTVsa-0001fW-Sl
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 28 Mar 2014 12:27:24 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.219.46 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.219.46; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-oa0-f46.google.com;
Received: from mail-oa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.219.46])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WTVsa-0002fK-3z
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 28 Mar 2014 12:27:24 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id i7so5868043oag.5
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 28 Mar 2014 05:27:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.44.42 with SMTP id b10mr85310oem.70.1396009638654; Fri,
28 Mar 2014 05:27:18 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.71.231 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 05:27:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <48ED312A-A1F9-4081-9718-04DD45804313@bitsofproof.com>
References: <CANEZrP0AwR3WgHfwYWcrC9Z_MHPDwymWXAQwp7D8XZ+o2FsK8g@mail.gmail.com>
<lh3m7i$v18$1@ger.gmane.org>
<CA+s+GJCf9o6VEky=JXgrG8v39hyQtPz71yuftF_jyp0bX9WHsA@mail.gmail.com>
<122FC5AD-2117-4CAF-817F-45B00F57D549@bitsofproof.com>
<CANEZrP30UsWsBJ-pzb=LQP-MB+PDE0buRdRbuUiOJxANLF9cpw@mail.gmail.com>
<48ED312A-A1F9-4081-9718-04DD45804313@bitsofproof.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 13:27:18 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8-r5ujEzuUR8FmXbcCqzswdGRFE
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3mEWq-kfZb_HdW53K=gAhY=660mRq6+unGV4XppVQimw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c30a049d7a4704f5a9d2a3
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
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: 1WTVsa-0002fK-3z
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP 70 refund field
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: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 12:27:25 -0000
--001a11c30a049d7a4704f5a9d2a3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> It is not more effort than an auto remembered call-in phone number. You
> delete if you do not care. The difference however is that it would be a
> clean protocol for repeated payments in both directions for whatever
> reason, where "refund" is and "payment" are not special compared to "1st
> installment", "overpayed back" or "tip" or whatever extra charge arises
> later.
>
I think that'd be too abstract. The purpose of the refund field is that so
if/when you receive a payment there, the wallet UI can do something
intelligent, like show you in your transactions list that a certain payment
was refunded using language the user will understand. If it's modelled at
the protocol level without that then it makes producing good UI's harder.
--001a11c30a049d7a4704f5a9d2a3
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style=3D"word-wrap:break-word"><div><div>It=
is not more effort than an auto remembered call-in phone number. You delet=
e if you do not care. The difference however is that it would be a clean pr=
otocol for repeated payments in both directions for whatever reason, where =
"refund" is and "payment" are not special compared to &=
quot;1st installment", "overpayed back" or "tip" =
=C2=A0or whatever extra charge arises later.</div>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think that'd be too abst=
ract. The purpose of the refund field is that so if/when you receive a paym=
ent there, the wallet UI can do something intelligent, like show you in you=
r transactions list that a certain payment was refunded using language the =
user will understand. If it's modelled at the protocol level without th=
at then it makes producing good UI's harder.</div>
</div></div></div>
--001a11c30a049d7a4704f5a9d2a3--
|
