Author: Luke Dashjr 2016-06-22 00:36:53
Published on: 2016-06-22T00:36:53+00:00
The email conversation on Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:42:39 PM between two individuals, Erik Aronesty and Luke, discussed the concept of "replacement addresses" and "UI confirms" in relation to BIP 32/47 support. The idea was that if someone found it difficult to deal with BIP 32 pub seed, replacement addresses could take their place. This would involve generating a new payment address each time a payment is made to Alice. However, if BIP 32 pub seed is supported, then this would not be necessary. Luke pointed out that since every payment requires communication with the recipient, it would make sense for the recipient to give a new scriptPubKey each time, without the need to save potentially compromised payment information in advance. Erik Aronesty agreed and added that he did not know of any wallets that support a BIP 32 pub seed as a destination address yet. He also argued that the point of payment protocols is to deprecate addresses, so the new protocol could be the BIP 32 pub seed destination address.Regarding hard-coding intervals or mandating specific policies from service providers, Luke disagreed with the idea but suggested that a field specifying how far in advance payments should be sent might work better. Erik Aronesty mentioned that he believed in providing strict guidelines that people can be called upon if they break them. He also stated that giving someone a specific interval for payments using this protocol would not be ideal. Instead, payment channels should be used, and the goal should be to create a lightweight protocol for monthly subscriptions.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T18:43:12.027204+00:00