To: Mike Hearn <hearn@vinumeris.com>
References: <55C75FC8.6070807@jrn.me.uk>
	<CA+w+GKS4O176C4-oGw913xvNSXzaBPO-UpU3SrzWR2yE-gcTwQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ross Nicoll <jrn@jrn.me.uk>
Message-ID: <55C77E80.3060203@jrn.me.uk>
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2015 17:23:28 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/38.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+w+GKS4O176C4-oGw913xvNSXzaBPO-UpU3SrzWR2yE-gcTwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="------------000707080009060206010200"
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Alternative chain support for payment protocol
Precedence: list

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------000707080009060206010200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm cautious of using human-meaningful identifiers, especially any that 
might require a central repository, due to name collisions. Examples 
that could be complicated include BitcoinDark, Litedoge, and other names 
that base on existing coins. I think the ability to differentiate 
between test networks is also useful.

Could certainly just use the genesis hash as network ID, that would 
work. Bit long, but suspect 64 bytes isn't the end of the world! I'll 
see if any more responses come in then raise a BIP for using genesis 
hash as an alternative to short names.

Ross

On 09/08/2015 15:29, Mike Hearn wrote:
>
>     I'd appreciate initial feedback on the idea, and if there's no
>     major objections I'll raise this as a BIP.
>
>
> The reason BIP 70 doesn't do this is the assumption that alt coins are 
> ... well .... alt. They can vary in arbitrary ways from Bitcoin, and 
> so things in BIP70 that work for Bitcoin may or may not work for other 
> coins.
>
> If your alt coin is close enough to BIP 70 that you can reuse it "as 
> is" then IMO we should just define a new network string for your alt. 
> network = "dogecoin-main" or whatever.
>
> You could also use the genesis hash as the network name. That works 
> too. But it's less clear and would involve lookups to figure out what 
> the request is for, if you find such a request in the wild. I don't 
> care much either way.


--------------000707080009060206010200
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    I'm cautious of using human-meaningful identifiers, especially any
    that might require a central repository, due to name collisions.
    Examples that could be complicated include BitcoinDark, Litedoge,
    and other names that base on existing coins. I think the ability to
    differentiate between test networks is also useful.<br>
    <br>
    Could certainly just use the genesis hash as network ID, that would
    work. Bit long, but suspect 64 bytes isn't the end of the world!
    I'll see if any more responses come in then raise a BIP for using
    genesis hash as an alternative to short names.<br>
    <br>
    Ross<br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/08/2015 15:29, Mike Hearn wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CA+w+GKS4O176C4-oGw913xvNSXzaBPO-UpU3SrzWR2yE-gcTwQ@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I'd
              appreciate initial feedback on the idea, and if there's no
              major objections I'll raise this as a BIP.<br>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>The reason BIP 70 doesn't do this is the assumption
              that alt coins are ... well .... alt. They can vary in
              arbitrary ways from Bitcoin, and so things in BIP70 that
              work for Bitcoin may or may not work for other coins.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>If your alt coin is close enough to BIP 70 that you can
              reuse it "as is" then IMO we should just define a new
              network string for your alt. network = "dogecoin-main" or
              whatever.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>You could also use the genesis hash as the network
              name. That works too. But it's less clear and would
              involve lookups to figure out what the request is for, if
              you find such a request in the wild. I don't care much
              either way.</div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>

--------------000707080009060206010200--