From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VYWpv-0004TW-Cz for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 07:57:07 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.217.173 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.173; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-lb0-f173.google.com; Received: from mail-lb0-f173.google.com ([209.85.217.173]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VYWpu-0003CY-C1 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 07:57:07 +0000 Received: by mail-lb0-f173.google.com with SMTP id w7so2253058lbi.18 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 00:56:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.22.131 with SMTP id d3mr744135laf.35.1382428619570; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 00:56:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.89.72 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 00:56:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <52662AA1.5050509@250bpm.com> References: <791a727f-2188-4848-bd77-ea733c8c5c2c@me.com> <201310211947.59640.luke@dashjr.org> <52661DB7.7040805@250bpm.com> <52662AA1.5050509@250bpm.com> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 00:56:59 -0700 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Martin Sustrik Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) 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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: 250bpm.com] X-Headers-End: 1VYWpu-0003CY-C1 Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Revisiting the BIPS process, a proposal 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, 22 Oct 2013 07:57:07 -0000 On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Martin Sustrik wrote: > There's also Security Considerations part in > every RFC that is pretty relevant for Bitcoin. Which would say something interesting like "If the bitcoin network implements inconsistent behavior in the consensus critical parts of the protocol the world ends. As such, conformance or _non_-conformance with this specification (in particular, sections 4. 5. and 6.) may be required for security." A Bitcoin protocol RFC would be a great place to exercise RFC 6919 keywords. ( http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6919 )