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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1WeoCa-00071p-Sb
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 28 Apr 2014 16:14:44 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.180 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.180; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f180.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WeoCY-00009g-WA
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 28 Apr 2014 16:14:44 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f180.google.com with SMTP id wm4so7577898obc.11
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 28 Apr 2014 09:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.29.225 with SMTP id n1mr1827496obh.2.1398701677696; Mon,
28 Apr 2014 09:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.96.180 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 09:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T2v=oX5eR9yoBULPVceZFD2_d+xMF7jQJACHYP=FgWK-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T2v=oX5eR9yoBULPVceZFD2_d+xMF7jQJACHYP=FgWK-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 18:14:37 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: S7Wy5VRW53zoYtdWyNbk2zckI_o
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1_FtEU3Pf3CibMg3YWn8Jn8E7GEj9_x9b3Ym4_yL-ZfA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2da9ca55e1104f81c9c5f
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: 1WeoCY-00009g-WA
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal to change payment protocol
signing
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: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 16:14:45 -0000
--001a11c2da9ca55e1104f81c9c5f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Who cares what it is? Setting to an empty byte array is fine, IMO. The
payment protocol is already rolling out. It's implemented in several
wallets, BitPay implements it, Coinbase is implementing it, etc.
-100000 for changing such a basic thing at this point. It'd cause chaos for
the early adopters, punishing them instead of rewarding them. It'd
seriously hurt adoption of the payment protocol when it's at its most
vulnerable. We should mark BIP 70 as accepted and be done with it.
--001a11c2da9ca55e1104f81c9c5f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Who cares what it is?=C2=A0Setting to an empty byte array =
is fine, IMO.=C2=A0The payment protocol is already rolling out. It's im=
plemented in several wallets, BitPay implements it,=C2=A0Coinbase is implem=
enting it, etc.<div>
<br></div><div>-100000 for changing such a basic thing at this point. It=
9;d cause chaos for the early adopters, punishing them instead of rewarding=
them. It'd seriously hurt adoption of the payment protocol when it'=
;s at its most vulnerable. We should mark BIP 70 as accepted and be done wi=
th it.=C2=A0</div>
<div><br></div></div>
--001a11c2da9ca55e1104f81c9c5f--
|
