From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99•net>
To: Mark van Cuijk <mark@coinqy•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "On behalf of" BIP 70 extension proposal
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 14:46:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3pU__65h3VFEshtHuXE-aXWkRR47QPXXMNmBrBNcb=SQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C9BF4A1A-5363-4725-8CFC-9EFE0C0B6B15@coinqy.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1299 bytes --]
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Mark van Cuijk <mark@coinqy•com> wrote:
> Good to see that it has been discussed, but I see the idea has been
> postponed.
>
I'm not sure postponed is the right word. It wasn't in v1, but many useful
things weren't. It's more like, a bunch of people have to do work to
upgrade this and at the moment they're all busy with other things.
> I do like the idea coined by Mike that a PP can issue non-SSL certificates
> for the purpose of merchant identification, as long as a customer is free
> to determine whether he trusts the PP for this purpose.
>
I don't think I proposed this exactly? It's the other way around - a
merchant issues an extension cert to allow the PP to act on their behalf.
> Regarding the choice of how to authenticate the PP, I’m a bit
> undetermined. Disregarding backward compatibility, I think the extended
> certificate system proposed by Mike is cleaner. However, I don’t like the
> concept of requiring two separate signatures for old and new clients.
> Taking backward compatibility in mind, I tend to prefer my proposal.
>
I'm not sure I understand. Your proposal also has two signatures. Indeed it
must because delegation of authority requires a signature, but old clients
won't understand it.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2070 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-28 12:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-27 6:55 Mark van Cuijk
2014-07-27 19:31 ` Mike Hearn
2014-07-28 9:01 ` Mark van Cuijk
2014-07-28 12:46 ` Mike Hearn [this message]
2014-07-28 13:06 ` Mark van Cuijk
2014-07-28 13:32 ` Mike Hearn
2014-07-30 7:54 ` Mark van Cuijk
2014-07-30 11:34 ` Mike Hearn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CANEZrP3pU__65h3VFEshtHuXE-aXWkRR47QPXXMNmBrBNcb=SQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=mike@plan99$(echo .)net \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=mark@coinqy$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox