Mike Hearn [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: đź“… Original date posted:2013-12-01 đź“ť Original message:> "This payment did not ...
đź“… Original date posted:2013-12-01
đź“ť Original message:> "This payment did not become spendable since xxx minutes. Check with the
> sender if s/he paid the Bitcoin network fee. Check if your internet
> connection is working properly." (incoming)
That seems reasonable.
The other message should be implementable today, I think? If numBroadcastPeers > 0 post 0.10.3 then you know the tx made it out to the internet.
Unfortunately if nodes start to diverge a lot in terms of what they will accept, then “transmitted” is no longer a clean binary yes/no thing. Guess we’ll have to jump that hurdle when we come to it.
> Guess you're right. But as you said, we're not there yet.
The payment protocol at least would need some notion of fee, or possibly (better?) the ability for a recipient to specify some inputs as well as some outputs.
Originally I think we were hoping for child-pays-for-parent. I guess that needs someone to sit down and focus on it for a while, assuming we still think that’s a good idea.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4127 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131201/e59627ff/attachment.p7s>;
đź“ť Original message:> "This payment did not become spendable since xxx minutes. Check with the
> sender if s/he paid the Bitcoin network fee. Check if your internet
> connection is working properly." (incoming)
That seems reasonable.
The other message should be implementable today, I think? If numBroadcastPeers > 0 post 0.10.3 then you know the tx made it out to the internet.
Unfortunately if nodes start to diverge a lot in terms of what they will accept, then “transmitted” is no longer a clean binary yes/no thing. Guess we’ll have to jump that hurdle when we come to it.
> Guess you're right. But as you said, we're not there yet.
The payment protocol at least would need some notion of fee, or possibly (better?) the ability for a recipient to specify some inputs as well as some outputs.
Originally I think we were hoping for child-pays-for-parent. I guess that needs someone to sit down and focus on it for a while, assuming we still think that’s a good idea.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4127 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131201/e59627ff/attachment.p7s>;