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-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WAO9E-0003Gu-1D for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 18:21:32 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of go-taxi.biz designates 68.178.252.106 as permitted sender) client-ip=68.178.252.106; envelope-from=tim@go-taxi.biz; helo=p3plsmtpa11-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net; Received: from p3plsmtpa11-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net ([68.178.252.106]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1WAO99-00044U-Ir for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 18:21:31 +0000 Received: from Tims-MacBook-Air.local ([96.53.121.150]) by p3plsmtpa11-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with id Mu8l1n00L3EndC001u8m4E; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:08:46 -0700 Message-ID: <52EFDB2F.3040604@go-taxi.biz> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:08:47 -0700 From: Tim Tuxworth User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) 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 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [68.178.252.106 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1WAO99-00044U-Ir Subject: [Bitcoin-development] BIP70: Canceling Payments 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: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 18:21:32 -0000 The process described in BIP70 might be ok for a simple "happy path" scenario, but what if things don't work so smoothly. I'm not talking here about technical issues, but _very common_ business scenarios such as: e.g. Merchant cancels request before payment is sent, such as when:- - the merchant realizes that they charged the wrong amount - the merchant realizes that they send the payment request to the wrong customer ... e.g. the Merchant or Customer decides to cancel the transaction after the payment request is sent because:- - the customer decides to pay by some other mechanism like cash or credit/debit - the customer doesn't have sufficient funds and decides not to purchase - the customer changes their mind and decides not to purchase ... It strikes me that a "Cancel Payment Request" message is required and a "Reject Payment Request" may also be required (or maybe use the same message for both). Tim Tuxworth