Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.212.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.212.175; envelope-from=andyparkins@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-wi0-f175.google.com; 
From: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 09:48:13 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/3.0.0-1-686-pae; KDE/4.6.3; i686; ; )
References: <201201311651.02726.andyparkins@gmail.com>
	<201201311158.50801.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <201201311158.50801.luke@dashjr.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart8260352.exK8TWir3u";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201202010948.13169.andyparkins@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP16/17 replacement
Precedence: list

--nextPart8260352.exK8TWir3u
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2012 January 31 Tuesday, Luke-Jr wrote:

> Both BIP 16 and 17 are backward compatible enough that people can continue
> to use the old clients with each other. An upgrade is only required to
> send to (or create/receive on) the new 3...-form addresses. That being

Is that true?  (I'm happy to be called wrong)

It doesn't seem like it to me.  The new transaction types will be rejected =
by=20
old clients won't they?  They don't pass IsStandard().


Andy

=2D-=20
Dr Andy Parkins
andyparkins@gmail.com

--nextPart8260352.exK8TWir3u
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc 
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAk8pCl0ACgkQwQJ9gE9xL23/ywCguI7MQdo0YusJ0NZe/HpVzt5h
jFIAn2dtTseD9EYvd8vqn49qi4DJG/uv
=Wvm4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart8260352.exK8TWir3u--