1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1Rbd7T-0001D4-BU
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 16 Dec 2011 19:06:59 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.175; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
helo=mail-we0-f175.google.com;
Received: from mail-we0-f175.google.com ([74.125.82.175])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Rbd7S-0005ct-Hj
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 16 Dec 2011 19:06:59 +0000
Received: by werm13 with SMTP id m13so894005wer.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:06:52 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.136.231 with SMTP id w81mr3747585wei.3.1324062412397; Fri,
16 Dec 2011 11:06:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.223.156.77 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:06:52 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1324060177.10146.YahooMailNeo@web121006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
References: <1323731781.42953.YahooMailClassic@web120920.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
<CAJna-HiR0qrOp2sG0hb=5bJ2H60y7QwC8BiHDVR9=kiV20W0vA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJ1JLttMWog=QSLmmM9HiZLQ2UU9sPmwAs2wVQoetW3yjMRPow@mail.gmail.com>
<201112161710.15165.andyparkins@gmail.com>
<CAJ1JLts8JQ2J=DqJTD76gq2KB02ycqqeJjwaDyY2tPX8SJwvVA@mail.gmail.com>
<1324060177.10146.YahooMailNeo@web121006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:06:52 -0500
Message-ID: <CABsx9T0pP4Wsxy0yMJTA0OSJY3EfeFQvqczfMdvu=j1iQmooag@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gavinandresen[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1Rbd7S-0005ct-Hj
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: [BIP 15] Aliases
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 19:06:59 -0000
First: everybody please try to focus on the issues/ideas, and try to
avoid this becoming a flame war.
Second: I think Walter Stanish made several good points that may have
been missed in all the long posts and discussion, the main one being:
The banking industry has been dealing with many of these issues for
years; I think we should not dismiss their experience.
I think there is also a huge public relations benefit to using a
standard like IIBAN instead of inventing our own. Having a Bitcoin
Payment Routing Address (or whatever it ends up being called) that
looks like the number issues by big financial institutions will give
people the warm fuzzies.
I don't really care what happens behind the scenes, as long as it is
as secure as an HTTPS connection (RE: CA pwnage: there's no such
thing as perfect security, and until a more secure solution comes
along HTTPS is the best we've got).
And I'll reiterate that there doesn't have to be just one solution.
My only concern is that IIBAN is Yet Another Fledgling Standard, and
those little details that remain to be worked out could take years to
actually work out.
--
--
Gavin Andresen
|
