>
> I hear that. But I don't see why mainstream wallets and wallets
> designed for crypto research should not share a common core.
>
I think there was some misunderstanding. I was saying they *could and
should* share common cores, so we are in agreement without realising it :)
I also didn't mean to imply there was anything special about bitcoinj, just
that it's an example of a wallet engine that's already in use.
> BIP70 is interesting, indeed, although I still fail to understand why
> (according to the specs I saw) the PaymentRequest message is signed,
> but not the Payment message.
>
Because it's intended to be submitted via HTTPS. But what would you sign
the message with? Some arbitrary key bound to the transaction?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.
GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn.
Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.
Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
