From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YQHbt-0000qV-LX for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:41:21 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from vm299.rz.uni-osnabrueck.de ([131.173.16.215] helo=mail-in-3.serv.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1YQHbr-0004WR-Qv for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:41:21 +0000 Received: from smtp-auth.serv.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE (vm136.rz.uni-osnabrueck.de [131.173.16.11]) by mail-in-3.serv.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t1OFfBjt003252 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:41:11 +0100 Received: from msmtp-using-host (ip4d17d118.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de [77.23.209.24]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp-auth.serv.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t1OFf9nO008520 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:41:10 +0100 Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:41:09 +0100 From: Jan Vornberger To: Andy Schroder Message-ID: <20150224154109.GA8940@odo.localdomain> References: <20150222190839.GA18527@odo.localdomain> <54EA5A1C.2020701@AndySchroder.com> <20150223150937.GA7987@odo.localdomain> <54EC16D3.3060103@AndySchroder.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54EC16D3.3060103@AndySchroder.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2015.2.24.152719 (Univ. Osnabrueck) X-PMX-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIIII, Probability=8%, Report= HTML_00_01 0.05, HTML_00_10 0.05, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_1200_1299 0, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS 0, NO_URI_FOUND 0, REFERENCES 0, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT 0, __CD 0, __CT 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __FORWARDED_MSG 0, __HAS_FROM 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __IN_REP_TO 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __REFERENCES 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END 0, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE 0, __TO_MALFORMED_2 0, __USER_AGENT 0 X-PMX-Spam-Level: IIIIIIII X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. X-Headers-End: 1YQHbr-0004WR-Qv Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin at POS using BIP70, NFC and offline payments - implementer feedback 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, 24 Feb 2015 15:41:21 -0000 On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 01:14:43AM -0500, Andy Schroder wrote: > I've had similar issues where the NFC device has to be disconnected > and reconnected. I've got lots of error checking in my code on the > NFC device, which helps, but still has problems sometimes. I've > found if I limit how quickly a new connection can be made, that > reduces the problem. Have you tried this? I have a limit there, yes, but maybe I need to raise it. I'd rather would like it to simply not jam up instead though. :-) > What command line tool are you using with libnfc? I don't remember exactly right now, but the Debian packages 'libnfc-bin' and 'libnfc-examples' have some binaries and I think I used one of them to present an NFC URI record and I ran into similar problems with instability. > This sounds weird to me. Why are you even using bitpay at all if you > are already going through the effort to remove a signature and > change the memo field? For their tie-in with the traditional banking system, i.e. cash-out in fiat. Here in Germany that might currently be the only feasible way of accepting bitcoins commercially, because of unresolved questions around VAT - but that's another topic. Jan