Post
📅 Original date posted:2011-07-26 🗒️ Summary of this message: Proposal to alleviate the need for unique Bitcoin addresses per transaction by using a SRV lookup and HTTPS request for Bitcoin address resolution. 📝 Original message:> > 1. Right now you practically need a unique Bitcoin address per transaction. I'd like to find ways to alievate this requirement. > 2. DNSSEC is on the edge of becoming illegal in the US. really, pointers please. DHS was a huge funder for DNSSEC asn .mil was the first domain to deploy it. I think you may be miss-informed. > 3. Emails aren't merely domains. correct, I was speaking about an "address" that used the same/simular formatting but did not use the SMTP protocol. -rick > I would propose something like resolving foo at bar.net to a SRV lookup for > _bitcoinaddressresolution._tcp.foo.bar.net, expecting a cert for bar.net, > making a HTTPS request for /bitcoinaddressresolution?foo at bar.net, and also > sending an email to foo at bar.net (the usual way) signed with the keys used for > the transaction. ;) >
📅 Original date posted:2011-07-26 🗒️ Summary of this message: Rick Wesson proposes ways to alleviate the requirement of a unique Bitcoin address per transaction, while addressing privacy concerns. DNSSEC legality in the US is questioned. 📝 Original message:On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 12:54:23 AM Rick Wesson wrote: > > 1. Right now you practically need a unique Bitcoin address per > > transaction. > > I'd like to find ways to alievate this requirement. Admittedly, my proposal to email a signed message allows one to reuse addresses, but there is still a privacy concern. > > 2. DNSSEC is on the edge of becoming illegal in the US. > > really, pointers please. DHS was a huge funder for DNSSEC asn .mil was > the first domain to deploy it. I think you may be miss-informed. www.google.com/search?q=%22PROTECT+IP+act%22+DNSSEC > > 3. Emails aren't merely domains. > > correct, I was speaking about an "address" that used the same/simular > formatting but did not use the SMTP protocol. I only meant that foo.bar.net is not the same formatting. foo at bar.net would be.