From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RaK8f-0004rg-H4 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 04:38:49 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of mm.st designates 66.111.4.26 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.111.4.26; envelope-from=theymos@mm.st; helo=out2.smtp.messagingengine.com; Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1RaK8e-0004Nn-Go for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 13 Dec 2011 04:38:49 +0000 Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.45]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id F04B921E5C for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 23:38:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from web3.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.213]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 12 Dec 2011 23:38:42 -0500 Received: by web3.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix, from userid 99) id B5B3240076; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 23:38:42 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1323751122.9491.140661010910705@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Sasl-Enc: dwLS2gmHMicUrHTAZaPdI81zQfybmMXRpUE9R7xCUeao 1323751122 From: "theymos" To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface References: <1323728469.78044.YahooMailNeo@web121012.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1323728469.78044.YahooMailNeo@web121012.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:38:42 -0600 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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (theymos[at]mm.st) -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: 1RaK8e-0004Nn-Go Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [BIP 15] Aliases X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 04:38:49 -0000 I like the user@server.com model. The protocol should be done entirely in DNS, though, not using HTTP connections to the server. Then the protocol can easily be used with Namecoin or other DNS replacements/enhancements later. Crypto to prevent MITM attacks can be an optional part of the protocol. Almost all users will be unable to set up *any* always-on Internet service to answer queries, so I'm not too concerned about how easy it is to set up the server software. I agree that FirstBits is bad for this. Unlike DNS, "registrations" last forever because private keys can't be transferred safely. All short names will be taken quickly. It will also be very expensive for clients to query this themselves. The CA model is broken and it should never be used by Bitcoin.