[Bitcoin-development] "On behalf of" BIP 70 extension proposal

Mike Hearn mike at plan99.net
Mon Jul 28 13:32:54 UTC 2014


>
> I referred to your idea in
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04076.html
> <https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04076.html> which
> is indeed not the proposal itself.
>

Right, gotcha. Had forgotten about that.

Indeed there is another signature, which is to authenticate the payment
> delegation. If you take it into account in the signature count, then your
> proposal has three signatures.
>

Yes, I see now, you are right. A mandate type system is probably simpler
indeed.

So what now? To be honest my next priority with BIP70 was to formalise the
extensions process, I've been dragging my feet over that because I'm
working on other things. And then after that to knock some heads together
over at BitPay/Coinbase and get them to put useful text in the memo field
instead of random numbers. Baby steps ....
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140728/dbcdf1d6/attachment.html>


More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list