From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BF86955 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 13:52:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail149082.authsmtp.co.uk [62.13.149.82]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B025E17E for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 13:52:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-c247.authsmtp.com (mail-c247.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.247]) by punt20.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id v8TDq78L098124; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:52:07 +0100 (BST) Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com [52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id v8TDq5co089848 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:52:06 +0100 (BST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D3BBB40018; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 13:52:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C68E5205E4; Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:52:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:52:03 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: Andreas Schildbach , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <20170929135203.GA16240@savin.petertodd.org> References: <20170927160654.GA12492@savin.petertodd.org> <20170929014543.GB11956@savin.petertodd.org> <20170929095537.GA15286@savin.petertodd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="azLHFNyN32YCQGCU" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Server-Quench: 618494a2-a51d-11e7-a0cc-0015176ca198 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aAdMdAsUC1AEAgsB AmEbWlBeVV97WWU7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq T0pMXVMcUg0MdV0E VUEeWhB6cw0If395 ZQhkX3hfVUArd1ss R08ACGwHMGB9OWBM A11YdwJRcQRMLU5E Y1gxNiYHcQ5VPz4z GA41ejw8IwAXAShZ WAwWNhofUV4KBDcg RhcEVSkuGEAeDz4z KAEiJhYWEQ4YPkk/ PRM9XhoyEidXU1IF dwAA X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1038:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Address expiration times should be added to BIP-173 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 13:52:10 -0000 --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 02:45:32PM +0200, Andreas Schildbach via bitcoin-de= v wrote: > On 09/29/2017 11:55 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote: >=20 > >>> I'm well aware. As the payment protocol hasn't caught on - and doesn'= t fully > >>> overlap all the usecases that addresses do anyway - I think we should= consider > >>> bringing this important feature to Bitcoin addresses too. > >> > >> Hasn't caught on? It is used for virtually all merchant transactions, > >> plus person to person transactions between Bitcoin Wallet users. > >=20 > > "Virtually all"? > >=20 > > I regularly pay with Bitcoin, and I haven't seen the payment protocol u= sed in > > ages. >=20 > I regularly pay with Bitcoin, and I haven't seen the payment protocol > not being in use in ages. >=20 > > Can you name some users of it? >=20 > 15+ Mio Coinbase users Lol, interesting mistake I made w/ Coinbase: my mobile wallets are all setu= p in ways that don't support the payment protocol w/ Coinbase, probably because = come to think of it they were (still are?) rejecting payment protocol requests o= ver proxies and Tor. And on my desktop setups payment protocol URLs don't work = for various reasons, and I'd forgotten I'd manually disabled them ages ago. Just checked and Bitfinex, BTCC, and Shapeshift all don't seem to use the payment protocol. Other than BitPay and Coinbase, do you have an example of a service support= ing the payment protocol? > ~10 Mio BitPay users > 8 Mio Bitcoin Wallet users > Plus Bitcoin Core, Electrum, etc (sorry no numbers) >=20 > Probably the only usecase for naked addresses is paper wallets, right? > I'm not sure if paper wallets can expire. User-to-user payments pretty much always use naked addresses. --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJZzk//AAoJECSBQD2l8JH7rmgH/j18CiwAAswJNTHgz7mr6E/G 5e+uaRnvAqnfNVUoLfs3vll1lOMkh3FXfuVwYJLffnNYToHdJpl+oZTRVDhF9C0T P1vUxEe1XHjwETgwFi3M1ltjXP9EWilAi+hzMKeLELOg7ZxW3mNGlMlqkPSdJHag fCJtMrt2M8v3++BpCY3piDShQf+wqM6vPxZbeFGrzSYK2EQ8JHVExVSxikcBvtq/ 6hDhKqhE3YOPpPGgnaswNp2ki6mZuNvBaJ7M4cGOA4MDH7kT8QNaKAnISbJLAlyE KPefAJ3GuDm9CqYN7B3k9AtIovQZQuK/HaS87crUTyskL7fDwo157Rr8MxABH8Y= =p8IC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU--