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-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TdM79-0006pL-F3 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 14:26:19 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.212.169 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.169; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com; helo=mail-wi0-f169.google.com; Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com ([209.85.212.169]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1TdM73-000331-W3 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 14:26:19 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id hq12so3455771wib.4 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 06:26:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.145.160 with SMTP id p32mr5197408wej.44.1354026367880; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 06:26:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.27.136 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 06:26:07 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <895A1D97-68B4-4A2F-B4A1-34814B9BA8AC@ceptacle.com> <626D0E73-1111-4380-AABE-6C8C65F2FFCC@ceptacle.com> <98E8A2D6-56D1-4E28-BB63-71E13382B5B8@ceptacle.com> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 09:26:07 -0500 Message-ID: From: Gavin Andresen To: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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 (gavinandresen[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 X-Headers-End: 1TdM73-000331-W3 Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Payment Protocol Proposal: Invoices/Payments/Receipts 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, 27 Nov 2012 14:26:19 -0000 One more thought: RE: "Receipt" verus "Acceptance" : I believe "Receipt" is the right term-- it means "I got your payment", NOT "your payment has cleared." E.g. if I hand a merchant a paper check they'll hand me a receipt, but the check could still bounce. That's the analogy here-- a merchant might give you a receipt, but if the transaction is rejected by the network for whatever reason (Finney attack maybe) you cannot expect to go to court with your invoice/receipt and claim you made a valid payment. -- -- Gavin Andresen