On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Mike Hearn <m...@plan99.net> wrote: >> Perhaps we should agree to talk about everything _except_ that first? > > Yeah, alternatives to X.509 chains don't interest me right now except > in the sense that they should be cleanly implementable with future > extensions. > > So if you care about DANE or DNSSEC or custom PKI infrastructures or > whatever, rather than proposing them as replacements here (DOA), just > figure out how you would extend the protocol in Gavins mail in a > future extension. If you can't see a clean way to do it then let's > discuss that. If you can think of a way to do it then let's table it. > Better replacements can come in later BIPs.
The only part that has an x509 cert associated is in the invoice message. message Invoice { // repeated bytes x509chain = 1; optional string domainName =1; repeated Output outputs = 2; required uint64 time = 3; optional uint64 expires = 4; optional bool single_use = 5 [default = true]; optional string memo = 6; optional string receiptURI = 7; optional bytes merchant_data = 8; } Removing that and adding a opaque string called domain name, or identityName would be sufficient to move the conversation forward without the x.509 baggage. -rick ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development