From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1XTQxA-0007TB-GE for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 07:44:04 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org
	designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=80.91.229.3;
	envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org;
	helo=plane.gmane.org; 
Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1XTQx7-0007L6-W5
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 07:44:04 +0000
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1XTQwy-0007do-8O for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:43:52 +0200
Received: from f052144115.adsl.alicedsl.de ([78.52.144.115])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:43:52 +0200
Received: from andreas by f052144115.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1
	(Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:43:52 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
From: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:43:32 +0200
Message-ID: <lv65b4$gf9$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <mailman.341412.1410515709.2178.bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>	<A4CC413B-D5A5-423C-9D56-463FCDBDDE08@coinqy.com>	<luuk5f$i8o$1@ger.gmane.org>	<CANEZrP1iTfZxY915hzoAEApz1+wd_S9j5RCwVJCNFqQ_+DNTSQ@mail.gmail.com>	<luv0dp$qms$1@ger.gmane.org>	<CANOOu=8RJgUW+=regOcqa9udiLr=nK=4fiZoW0fj2UU2GCjH3w@mail.gmail.com>	<CANOOu=-yhKK-db+VtoJbWH8H_rwrNHqXM1J12SketBXeLL6L1Q@mail.gmail.com>	<CANEZrP2adsaM8dtA94JV+5qThDNrT8m+X45-q_DecT42i5L=jg@mail.gmail.com>	<CANEZrP2D9RbMVHS12PnEjXiz7TjjGFDvybOs6+kCb-aZKwXy-A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACq0ZD6ocZ62rvRQaxQZ3moH3kC-uK_US3+p67Y+8bMJB_-b5A@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: f052144115.adsl.alicedsl.de
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1
In-Reply-To: <CACq0ZD6ocZ62rvRQaxQZ3moH3kC-uK_US3+p67Y+8bMJB_-b5A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-)
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 SPF_HELO_PASS          SPF: HELO matches SPF record
	1.1 DKIM_ADSP_ALL          No valid author signature,
	domain signs all mail
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	-0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain
X-Headers-End: 1XTQx7-0007L6-W5
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP72 amendment proposal
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 07:44:04 -0000

On 09/12/2014 08:43 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:

> Should BIP72 require that signed payment requests be from the same
> domain,

Although it currently does not seem to be used that way, I'd like to see
merchants sign their payment requests but store them on their payment
processors server. Currently if you buy from Humble Bundle, all you see
is Coinbase which is unfortunate.

> and also require https?

I think that's unrealistic. HTTP is already in use, and also the
proposed spec is open to other transports, e.g. Bluetooth which is also
already in common use.