From: Jordan Mack <jordanmack@parhelic.com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [BIP 15] Aliases
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:22:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EEF8F13.70508@parhelic.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJna-Hgq2CLq+bKxHweGtH4ujjYoNtbBY25XwdQXOd4GNdEnyg@mail.gmail.com>
If alias resolution was guaranteed to always be just the address, then
yes, I would opt for no serialization at all. A simple plain text
response of an address is about as simple as it can get.
There are already a lot of good ideas floating around about how the
alias protocol could be extended. Is it really going to stay that simple
for long? I would personally much just have a serialized response
upfront, rather than having to worry about backward compatibility in the
future.
On 12/19/2011 10:17 AM, slush wrote:
> In my opinion, there's not necessary any payload format (json, xml,
> multipart). In keeping stuff KISS, everything we need is just an address
> in response + potentially some stuff like HTTP redirects (for providing
> additional compatibility for proposal of bitcoin URIs with "amount",
> "label" and other parts). I don't see reason why we need some extra
> payload yet.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-19 19:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-12 22:21 [Bitcoin-development] [BIP 15] Aliases Amir Taaki
2011-12-12 22:25 ` Amir Taaki
2011-12-12 22:32 ` Luke-Jr
2011-12-13 4:38 ` theymos
2011-12-13 7:41 ` Jorge Timón
2011-12-15 19:59 ` theymos
2011-12-15 23:56 ` Amir Taaki
2011-12-16 2:37 ` Kyle Henderson
2011-12-16 4:32 ` Walter Stanish
2011-12-16 2:48 ` Matt Corallo
2011-12-16 17:23 ` Khalahan
2011-12-16 19:54 ` slush
2011-12-16 20:10 ` Amir Taaki
2011-12-16 20:14 ` Harald Schilly
2011-12-16 21:52 ` Khalahan
2011-12-16 22:05 ` Rick Wesson
2011-12-18 21:05 ` Jorge Timón
2011-12-18 21:18 ` Jordan Mack
2011-12-18 21:44 ` Luke-Jr
2011-12-18 23:58 ` slush
2011-12-19 1:13 ` Luke-Jr
2011-12-19 1:14 ` Pieter Wuille
2011-12-19 1:43 ` Luke-Jr
2011-12-19 1:44 ` slush
2011-12-19 7:56 ` Jorge Timón
2011-12-19 11:44 ` Andy Parkins
2011-12-19 14:46 ` solar
2011-12-19 15:35 ` Rick Wesson
2011-12-19 16:35 ` Luke-Jr
2011-12-19 17:13 ` solar
2011-12-19 16:30 ` Luke-Jr
2011-12-19 17:04 ` Jordan Mack
2011-12-19 17:09 ` slush
2011-12-19 18:13 ` Jordan Mack
2011-12-19 18:17 ` slush
2011-12-19 18:50 ` Jorge Timón
2011-12-19 20:03 ` Jordan Mack
2011-12-19 19:22 ` Jordan Mack [this message]
2011-12-19 18:15 ` Luke-Jr
2011-12-19 18:52 ` Jordan Mack
2011-12-19 19:16 ` Luke-Jr
2011-12-19 20:03 ` Jordan Mack
2011-12-16 8:35 ` Pieter Wuille
2011-12-16 16:03 ` Rick Wesson
2011-12-16 16:17 ` Pieter Wuille
2011-12-16 16:21 ` Rick Wesson
2011-12-16 17:21 ` Andy Parkins
2011-12-12 23:16 Zell Faze
2011-12-12 23:37 ` Jorge Timón
2011-12-12 23:41 ` Luke-Jr
2011-12-13 2:39 ` Stefan Thomas
2011-12-12 23:52 ` Matt Corallo
2011-12-12 23:37 ` Will
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4EEF8F13.70508@parhelic.com \
--to=jordanmack@parhelic.com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox