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 1YQCvN-00050Q-9P for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:41:09 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.179 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.179; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-we0-f179.google.com; Received: from mail-we0-f179.google.com ([74.125.82.179]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YQCvL-0004zz-WD for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:41:09 +0000 Received: by wevm14 with SMTP id m14so24239565wev.13 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 02:41:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.121.168 with SMTP id ll8mr29841573wjb.35.1424774461973; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 02:41:01 -0800 (PST) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.194.188.11 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 02:41:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <54EBC187.2050600@voskuil.org> References: <20150222190839.GA18527@odo.localdomain> <54EA5A1C.2020701@AndySchroder.com> <54EA60D9.8000001@voskuil.org> <54EA66F5.2000302@AndySchroder.com> <54EAD884.8000205@AndySchroder.com> <54EAFC1C.9080502@voskuil.org> <54EBB10D.8020502@voskuil.org> <54EBC187.2050600@voskuil.org> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:41:01 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Jvus9yUPY5dkSsu8Mua6PYk4xQE Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Eric Voskuil Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01227e9eb0ecd4050fd32721 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 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: 1YQCvL-0004zz-WD Cc: Bitcoin Dev , Andreas Schildbach Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin at POS using BIP70, NFC and offline payments - implementer feedback 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, 24 Feb 2015 10:41:09 -0000 --089e01227e9eb0ecd4050fd32721 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Does this not also require the BT publication of the script for a P2SH > address? You mean if the URI you're serving is like this? bitcoin:3aBcD........?bt=.... Yes it would. I guess then, the server would indicate both the script, and the key within that script that it wanted to use. A bit more complex but would still work to save URI space. --089e01227e9eb0ecd4050fd32721 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Does this not also require the BT publication of= the script for a P2SH
address?

You mean if the URI you're ser= ving is like this?

=C2=A0 =C2=A0bitcoin:3aBcD.....= ...?bt=3D....

Yes it would. I guess then, the serv= er would indicate both the script, and the key within that script that it w= anted to use. A bit more complex but would still work to save URI space.
--089e01227e9eb0ecd4050fd32721--