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-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1W3Zil-0004QY-1W for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 23:18:03 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gnomon.org.uk designates 93.93.131.22 as permitted sender) client-ip=93.93.131.22; envelope-from=roy@gnomon.org.uk; helo=darla.gnomon.org.uk; Received: from darla.gnomon.org.uk ([93.93.131.22]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1W3Zij-0005yZ-3J for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 23:18:03 +0000 Received: from darla.gnomon.org.uk (localhost.gnomon.org.uk [127.0.0.1]) by darla.gnomon.org.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s0FNHYsn046648 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 15 Jan 2014 23:17:39 GMT (envelope-from roy@darla.gnomon.org.uk) Received: (from roy@localhost) by darla.gnomon.org.uk (8.14.3/8.14.1/Submit) id s0FNHYOg046647; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 23:17:34 GMT (envelope-from roy) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 23:17:34 +0000 From: Roy Badami To: Jeff Garzik Message-ID: <20140115231733.GW38964@giles.gnomon.org.uk> References: <20140113133746.GI38964@giles.gnomon.org.uk> <20140114225321.GT38964@giles.gnomon.org.uk> <20140115230423.GU38964@giles.gnomon.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) 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 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.3 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1W3Zij-0005yZ-3J Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Stealth Addresses 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: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 23:18:03 -0000 How about just calling them 'type S addresses'? Not sure any other name will in reality convey much more meaning than that. On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 06:07:28PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > "Routing address" is pretty good too. Unsure whether the synergy and > familiarity with bank routing numbers improves the situation, or > not... > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Roy Badami wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 03:44:17PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> "static address" seems like a reasonable attempt at describing intended > >> use/direction. > > > > ...as opposed to an address configured by DHCP? > > > > More seriously, I don't think a typical user will understand anything from > > the phrase "static address". But it is a neutral name, and it is shorter > > than "address-of-a-type-for-which-reuse-is-not-deprecated". :-) > > > > -roy > > > > -- > Jeff Garzik > Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist > BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ >