James MacWhyte [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2016-03-10 📝 Original message:Hi everyone, Our BIP ...
📅 Original date posted:2016-03-10
📝 Original message:Hi everyone,
Our BIP (officially proposed on March 1) has tentatively been assigned
number 75. Also, the title has been changed to "Out of Band Address
Exchange using Payment Protocol Encryption" to be more accurate.
We thought it would be good to take this opportunity to add some optional
fields to the BIP70 paymentDetails message. The new fields are:
subtractable fee (give permission to the sender to use some of the
requested amount towards the transaction fee), fee per kb (the minimum fee
required to be accepted as zeroconf), and replace by fee (whether or not a
transaction with the RBF flag will be accepted with zeroconf). I know it
doesn't make much sense for merchants to accept RBF with zeroconf, so that
last one might be used more to explicitly refuse RBF transactions (and
allow the automation of choosing a setting based on who you are transacting
with).
I see BIP75 as a general modernization of BIP70, so I think it should be
fine to include these extensions in the new BIP, even though these fields
are not specific to the features we are proposing. Please take a look at
the relevant section and let me know if anyone has any concerns:
https://github.com/techguy613/bips/blob/master/bip-0075.mediawiki#Extending_BIP70_PaymentDetails
The BIP70 extensions page in our fork has also been updated.
Thanks!
James
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160310/f5ce8ae6/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:Hi everyone,
Our BIP (officially proposed on March 1) has tentatively been assigned
number 75. Also, the title has been changed to "Out of Band Address
Exchange using Payment Protocol Encryption" to be more accurate.
We thought it would be good to take this opportunity to add some optional
fields to the BIP70 paymentDetails message. The new fields are:
subtractable fee (give permission to the sender to use some of the
requested amount towards the transaction fee), fee per kb (the minimum fee
required to be accepted as zeroconf), and replace by fee (whether or not a
transaction with the RBF flag will be accepted with zeroconf). I know it
doesn't make much sense for merchants to accept RBF with zeroconf, so that
last one might be used more to explicitly refuse RBF transactions (and
allow the automation of choosing a setting based on who you are transacting
with).
I see BIP75 as a general modernization of BIP70, so I think it should be
fine to include these extensions in the new BIP, even though these fields
are not specific to the features we are proposing. Please take a look at
the relevant section and let me know if anyone has any concerns:
https://github.com/techguy613/bips/blob/master/bip-0075.mediawiki#Extending_BIP70_PaymentDetails
The BIP70 extensions page in our fork has also been updated.
Thanks!
James
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160310/f5ce8ae6/attachment.html>;