Please don&#39;t create BIPs that don&#39;t have any actual implementation behind them. Design discussion is fine but the mailing list works for that.<div><br></div><div>If I were going to implement escrow transactions in BitCoinJ it would not matter what was written here. I&#39;d just implement the design I thought made sense. If that design was later adopted by others it can be documented and agreed upon in a BIP, just like a regular RFC.</div>
<div><br></div><div>For what it&#39;s worth I would not attempt to send half-valid escrow transactions through the p2p network, not even using the overlay networks the protocol already supports. A correct escrow protocol requires the seller to challenge the dispute mediator with the public key to be sure they actually own it, and the simplest way to do that is to leverage the existing DNS/EV-SSL infrastructure with a &quot;sign this nonce&quot; HTTP request. </div>
<div><br></div><div>BIPs should not be a place for people to come up with armchair designs, because a design with no corresponding implementation is likely to be full of problems. Let&#39;s revisit this once I can install some software on my laptop, my server, and a friends server, and do a 3-way mediated transaction between them.</div>