From: Chuck <chuck+bitcoindev@borboggle.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Cc: Bitcoin-Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP70 message delivery reliability
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:15:10 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52EA343E.4010208@borboggle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP0soR0xRqW=vsKaL__HRuWstA5vW=6_JkGZm=8wkm8Q3g@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Mike. Thanks for replying.
On 1/30/2014 5:49 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Both Bitcoin Core and bitcoinj are about to ship with the protocol
> as-is, so any changes from this point on have to be backwards compatible.
Then I think it's critically important to talk about failure situations
now, rather than trying to patch on solutions later; it's going to be
very hard to wedge/"hack" in fixes for potential problems when they
could be addressed now with minor changes.
> Let's get some practical experience with what we've got so far. We can
> evolve PaymentRequest/Payment/PaymentACK in the right direction with
> backwards compatible upgrades, I am hoping.
I think what I'm trying to discuss or find out here is whether the
current PP description is defunct or incomplete in some manner, thus
making any experience we gain from the current implementation moot.
It seems the largest hole in the implementation is delivery of the
Payment message, but I'm happy to accept that maybe I'm just missing
something. A malicious merchant could claim he never received the
Payment message, or a faulty network connection could cause the message
to never be delivered. In arbitration the merchant could argue the
transactions seen on the network were insufficient.
To me, this could be a problem.
Cheers,
Chuck
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-30 11:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-30 5:47 [Bitcoin-development] BIP70 message delivery reliability Chuck
2014-01-30 10:49 ` Mike Hearn
2014-01-30 11:15 ` Chuck [this message]
2014-01-30 11:31 ` Mike Hearn
2014-01-30 11:42 ` Chuck
2014-01-30 11:46 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-01-30 11:59 ` Mike Hearn
2014-01-30 12:02 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-01-30 12:03 ` Chuck
2014-01-30 12:20 ` Roy Badami
2014-01-30 12:38 ` Mike Hearn
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=52EA343E.4010208@borboggle.com \
--to=chuck+bitcoindev@borboggle.com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=mike@plan99.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