Jeff Garzik [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: š Original date posted:2012-11-26 š Original message:On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at ...
š
Original date posted:2012-11-26
š Original message:On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is the next big "lets all agree to do things the same way" thing
> I think we should tackle. I'm particularly looking for feedback from
> other bitcoin client developers, even if it is just a quick "looks
> reasonable, if everybody else is going to do it then I will
> (eventually) too..."
Comments:
1) Payment message should include ability to specify the transaction
_or_ a transaction id sent via normal means over the network.
2) I think a significant bitcoin userbase will want to operate outside
the full root-CA chain. Just look at https:// websites now.
Self-signed certs are quite common, because it is easier, while being
more secure than http://
So some provision for self-signed certs, a use case in wide use
elsewhere, or equivalent thereof, seems reasonable.
--
Jeff Garzik
exMULTI, Inc.
jgarzik at exmulti.com
š Original message:On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is the next big "lets all agree to do things the same way" thing
> I think we should tackle. I'm particularly looking for feedback from
> other bitcoin client developers, even if it is just a quick "looks
> reasonable, if everybody else is going to do it then I will
> (eventually) too..."
Comments:
1) Payment message should include ability to specify the transaction
_or_ a transaction id sent via normal means over the network.
2) I think a significant bitcoin userbase will want to operate outside
the full root-CA chain. Just look at https:// websites now.
Self-signed certs are quite common, because it is easier, while being
more secure than http://
So some provision for self-signed certs, a use case in wide use
elsewhere, or equivalent thereof, seems reasonable.
--
Jeff Garzik
exMULTI, Inc.
jgarzik at exmulti.com