On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 3:11:25 PM Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Luke Dashjr <l...@dashjr.org> wrote: > > They can already do this. It's perfectly valid for wallets/services to > > ignore (and not consider as payment) transactions using an address more > > than once. There might be race attacks if this is implemented in an > > immediate fashon (attacker transaction gets mined first to kill a > > payment), but should be pretty safe after a few blocks. > > Sure it's valid. However, few users will appreciate "you ignored my > deposit" as a feature. > > Payment protocol just doesn't well the use cases of, > * an on-going payment stream from, e.g. Eligius to coinbase
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0032.mediawiki#Serialization_format > * deposit addresses and deposit situations There's no reason deposits cannot use a unique payment request or address every time... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
