[Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin TX fill-or-kill deterministic behavior
pieter.wuille at gmail.com
Sat Apr 14 21:27:16 UTC 2012
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 04:20:50PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >> Furthermore, many of these ideas -- like sending TX's directly to the
> >> merchant -- involve far more direct payee<->payer communication on the
> >> part of the wallet client than is currently envisioned
> > Yes, though it's worth remembering that the original Bitcoin design
> > did have participants communicate directly. When I talked with Satoshi
> > in 2009 he saw the pay-to-IP-address mode imagined as the normal way
> > to make payments, with pay-to-address being used as a kind of backup
> > for when the recipient was offline.
> > In the end that's not how things evolved, but it the pendulum could
> > easily swing back the other way.
> But I also have a "gut feeling" that these sorts of payments and
> direct communication should be done via a wholly separate protocol
> than the bitcoin P2P protocol. Doing p2ip as it was done originally,
> inside the bitcoin P2P protocol, was a mistake. Extensible as it is,
> I think a better job -- and faster evolution -- can be done with a
> separate protocol on a separate port.
> Some HTTP derivative would probably make life easier for mobile
> payments and firewalled scenarios, and for client->merchant
> communications, for instance.
Have you ever read https://gist.github.com/1237788 ?
More information about the bitcoin-dev