[Bitcoin-development] [BIP 15] Aliases

Jordan Mack jordanmack at parhelic.com
Sun Dec 18 21:18:58 UTC 2011

I can't speak for Namecoin. As for the HTTPS requirement, I'm on the 
fence. Without it, the resolution is open to a man in the middle attack. 
Perhaps HTTPS should be required, and if HTTP is used, a large warning 
message is displayed.

As for the answered message format, is JSON the assumed structure that 
would be used?

On 12/18/2011 1:05 PM, Jorge Timón wrote:
> If we chose the simple URI proposal namecoin can still be integrated
> to map the IP of the server by those who want to.
> Does it removes the necessity of the certificates?
> If so, we should let people decide between HTTP, HTTPS, namecoin or
> whatever they trust.
> Shouldn't we be also discussing the valid format of the answered
> message? I mean fields like "amount", "concept" and such.

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list