From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1U4FgZ-0005NX-E9 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 19:02:03 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1U4FgX-0006TF-OH for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 09 Feb 2013 19:02:03 +0000 Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [173.170.142.26]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 360AC27A2968; Sat, 9 Feb 2013 19:01:55 +0000 (UTC) From: "Luke-Jr" To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net, timo.hanke@web.de Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 19:01:48 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.7.3-gentoo; KDE/4.9.5; x86_64; ; ) References: <20130208100354.GA26627@crunch> <20130208110108.GA6893@savin> <20130209143325.GA3998@crunch> In-Reply-To: <20130209143325.GA3998@crunch> X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201302091901.49930.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1U4FgX-0006TF-OH Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Blockchain as root CA for payment protocol 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: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 19:02:03 -0000 On Saturday, February 09, 2013 2:33:25 PM Timo Hanke wrote: > > Why don't you use namecoin or another alt-chain for this? > > Because namcoin tries to solve a different problem, DNS, whereas I want > to establish an identity for a payment protocol. What is the technical difference here? Namecoin ties names to data; DNS is a specific namespace in it. There is no reason I know of that this identity stuff cannot be a new namespace. > You can argue that alt-chains _can_ be as strong as bitcoin, but they > don't _have to_ be. There is no guarantee how many people will > cross-mine. This is true of namecoin, but it does not have to be true of new merged-mined data. You could very well require the Bitcoin proof-of-work to be valid and the master header to be in the Bitcoin blockchain. > The alt-chain could even disappear at some point. If at some point your alt- > chain is no longer being worked on, then how do you prove that some old > bitcoin transaction went to an address for which there was a valid > id/certificate at the time of sending? If the certificate is based inside > bitcoin's blockchain then you will have a proof for the correct destinations > of all your old transactions as long as bitcoin exists. Yes, if people stop using your system, it won't work. Consider that a "this idea failed" scenario, where it doesn't matter. Luke