Ross Nicoll [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-08-09 📝 Original message:BIP 70 currently lists two ...
📅 Original date posted:2015-08-09
📝 Original message:BIP 70 currently lists two networks, main and test (inferred as
testnet3) for payment protocol requests. This means that different
testnets cannot be supported trivially, and the protocol cannot be used
for alternative coins (or, lacks context to indicate which coin the
request applies to, which is particularly dangerous in cases where coins
share address prefixes).
I propose adding a new optional "genesis" field as a 16 byte sequence
containing the SHA-256 hash of the genesis block of the network the
request belongs to, uniquely identifying chains without any requirement
for a central registry. For backwards compatibility, the "network" field
would contain "main" for Bitcoin main net, "test" for Bitcoin testnet3,
and "other" for other networks apart from those two.
I'd appreciate initial feedback on the idea, and if there's no major
objections I'll raise this as a BIP.
Ross
📝 Original message:BIP 70 currently lists two networks, main and test (inferred as
testnet3) for payment protocol requests. This means that different
testnets cannot be supported trivially, and the protocol cannot be used
for alternative coins (or, lacks context to indicate which coin the
request applies to, which is particularly dangerous in cases where coins
share address prefixes).
I propose adding a new optional "genesis" field as a 16 byte sequence
containing the SHA-256 hash of the genesis block of the network the
request belongs to, uniquely identifying chains without any requirement
for a central registry. For backwards compatibility, the "network" field
would contain "main" for Bitcoin main net, "test" for Bitcoin testnet3,
and "other" for other networks apart from those two.
I'd appreciate initial feedback on the idea, and if there's no major
objections I'll raise this as a BIP.
Ross