From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB5F5C077D for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 20:00:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5F66883CC for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 20:00:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OntKRdxR28WL for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 20:00:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wm1-f54.google.com (mail-wm1-f54.google.com [209.85.128.54]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C63B2883AA for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2019 20:00:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm1-f54.google.com with SMTP id n9so4758495wmd.3 for ; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 12:00:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:message-id:date :to; bh=JcbtfzBD7Xs6wnBNJ2yKHRtJYY9+eTgyX7w7coe0g/Q=; b=rvhoF5w3ij66S8pb2Qv4jPJ+AoCKJI6FsPbOeeeXmsRvebKpuQIdLtdaFO9BBMVxqj 44MnqIUxFFlLA8sImgkBUVQ0oa4WbEwWdm5C9JB1bp3OpORCj0cEaH+ULSNjibhscsaI 55VCCo7Nq4/sK5OPftzMRzmQLF0dwC+LIlcK7n52Yz9GQdKGEkQAVf+0EpYCApq7qJFI yNFhnlUvH43L15jnd8FRWaAP97TymmX5x9LEF2biMwNE4N0f/mw6+GeXq7LF0zyEdpu4 07iGP1/zxl5Hhf9HHKuQwqVii7arI4j3gmNWceYO+sGaXqKQf8XR9nGwA7JXdKPGQj6E xdng== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:message-id:date:to; bh=JcbtfzBD7Xs6wnBNJ2yKHRtJYY9+eTgyX7w7coe0g/Q=; b=o8tuKlWY9MhKbZlmwKPfotgfjCgIDrvDQkriPm4FqGjL4uJ3wRQJsIdI27WyUc23dx Rrwav+hbxjI67hDE9qwobnF1xqG/JvRQjuNrJf+Nir5x2UDTnpm0BG3av6iaS4dk9Xcc 4ece2VNem+qwBJh7vqG5EGKiLJPFSr0eUn7nhWLX/iUrxFB+MTbMW5+SwNjgvIu5vvW7 SH66iS4oH8Gc6OUClGrlQSWz97dVPyp/d6fXJFlRDZNt9WV9eg/Vgq9QMN87C78NUg54 lfARmXube3W9rA8pCBMRLKesNwiTtLjCyc3wPEILKGA9IbSgs7SFi5fADiCA54mygY0y /60g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXhU9U6ur2FKLJPNx9katDVS3hEPmNVf4ZJVZ1KNDzuy34kneEu xNNBgy88sbA8oTb5eRS13SMB1Gmg X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxeTk80MVJGjfIDjF1UrvlpSwWmwd082+4ZIoGK9scK8NuLD6zHYpwhHV22UI9v3pEFB5Cppw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:9e58:: with SMTP id h85mr7103868wme.77.1575576004917; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 12:00:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.35] ([178.60.38.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9sm12809520wrj.10.2019.12.05.12.00.04 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Dec 2019 12:00:04 -0800 (PST) From: =?utf-8?Q?Jose_Femen=C3=ADas_Ca=C3=B1uelo?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Message-Id: Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 21:00:03 +0100 To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 20:23:28 +0000 Subject: [bitcoin-dev] easypaysy - A layer-two protocol to send payments without addresses X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 20:00:11 -0000 Hi ZmnSCPxj first of all, excuse me for my delayed answer.=20 I think I posted to the wrong address the first time (I=E2=80=99m mainly = a lurker in the list, so I make gotchas like that=E2=80=A6) Let me address your points. > It also means that to register an account, you need to either own some = Bitcoins, or rent some Bitcoins to serve as signalling (and then = potentially have to change your account identifier later when the lease = expires).=20 I don=E2=80=99t understand what you mean by =E2=80=98renting=E2=80=99 = Bitcoins.=20 Once you commit the account transaction, the account ID never changes. (Also, you don=E2=80=99t need to own Bitcoins if you use a Master = Easypaysy Account. See my comments later on). > Finally, use of the blockchain layer is costly; given that payees must = be online at any time payers wish to pay, it may do better to just use = Lightning instead, That is not the case.=20 When using non-interactive payments, the payee doesn=E2=80=99t need to = be online at all. Even for interactive payments, it depends on the protocol you use. For Bitmessage, or email, or even MQTT you don=E2=80=99t need to be = online simultaneously. (The interactive protocol(s) is still open, = however, those are just some hypothetical examples): Anyway, when using interactive payments, the payee has the option to = specify an LN invoice and/or a bitcoin address. > which has the same requirement, but moves payments to a separate layer = as well, and requires only a single onchain transaction to construct a = channel (easypaysy seems to require at least 2, one to anchor the = account pubkeys, the other to give the basic "activation" information = for the account).=20 Easypaysy accounts don=E2=80=99t need 2 TXs. They need funding plus a TX = for the account information itself. So, you need an UTXO -to fund the account- and a TX.=20 But the UTXO can be one of many in the same transaction.=20 So, you could fund multiple accounts with a single TX. > Also, one of the contact-information protocols supported should = probably be Tor hidden services, instead of `https`. Tor hidden services = have better useability (no need for port forwarding or registering DNS = from some centralized service), with privacy as a bonus.=20 Easypaysy is protocol agnostic (for now). So, Tor is definitely a = possibility. > Further it seems insufficient to only encode block and tx index. I = think it should also encode output index, to also allow a single = transaction to anchor multiple accounts. Also consider using the = Lightning encoding of identifying an output: 543847x636x2=20 There is really no need to specify an additional output. If I am right, you can=E2=80=99t have more than one OP_RETURN per = transaction. On the other hand, as you can see in the white paper =E2=80=9C4.2 Master = accounts=E2=80=9D, these type of accounts allow for up to 2048 accounts = per transaction. The format of the ID in this case is: btc@master_idx.slave_id/checksum The master_idx is an ordinal pointer (not positional) to the Master TX, = while the slave_id points to one of the 2048 transactions within the = account (whose information is stored elsewhere, protected by a Merkle = root committed in the Master Tx) There is a little bit more to it that seems appropriate to discuss here, = please have a look at page 25 of the white paper. Thanks for your input. Best regards, Jos=C3=A9 Femen=C3=ADas=