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.