That's fine. I just want to make sure it's considered for inclusion at
some point, because I really hope to leverage the "identity" mechanism I
just described, and it's much easier if it's part of a standard instead
of convincing others to go around the standard with us.
I have not spent much tim
As Mike said: the payment protocol doesn't use bitcoin addresses under
the covers.
It is also designed to be easily extensible, so if you want the server
to send the wallet software a public key and multiplier, then add
"publickey" and "multiplier" optional fields to the PaymentDetails (or
maybe O
It's BIP specified and implemented in Bitcoin-Qt so now is the time to
start :) I'm hoping that most wallets can announce support near
simultaneously
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Alan Reiner wrote:
> That's fine. I just want to make sure it's considered for inclusion at
> some point,
Payment protocol is locked down for v1 already. But did you read it? It
doesn't use addresses anywhere. Payments are specified in terms of a list
of outputs which can contain any script. Of course it could be a
pay-to-address script, but pay-to-address uses more bytes in the chain and
there isn't a
4 matches
Mail list logo
