{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub10plv6jx6pktpp5ezldnus6kj8ffg045g2kdjl78w23njrlveqy5s3pfaef","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub10plv6jx6pktpp5ezldnus6kj8ffg045g2kdjl78w23njrlveqy5s3pfaef","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-01-25\n📝 Original message:That was essentially what we did in the end, we replaced the network\nidentifier (\"main\"/\"test\") with the genesis block hash. The result is\nnever going to accidentally work with Bitcoin Core (nor vice-versa), but\nis readily extensible to any other altcoins that want to use the\nspecification without requiring any sort of central registry.\n\nRoss\n\nOn 24/01/15 13:19, Isidor Zeuner wrote:\n\u003e\u003e For what it's worth, there was consideration of replacing protocol\n\u003e\u003e buffers when modifying BIP70 to function with the altcoin I work on\n\u003e\u003e (changes were required anyway in eliminate any risk that payment\n\u003e\u003e requests could not be accidentally applied to the wrong blockchain).\n\u003e\n\u003e Why not serialize some kind of blockchain identifier with the\n\u003e messages? Arbitrarily deviating from a given design choice just for\n\u003e the sake of doing it differently may serve the goal of creating more\n\u003e overall code diversity, but would not necessarily serve the quality of\n\u003e the blockchain network where it is done for.\n\u003e\n\u003e Best regards,\n\u003e\n\u003e Isidor"}