<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1s4lj77xuzcu7wy04afcr487f0r3za0f8n2775xrpkld2sv639mjqsd44kw</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1s4lj77xuzcu7wy04afcr487f0r3za0f8n2775xrpkld2sv639mjqsd44kw</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2012-11-29&#xA;📝 Original message:RE: Roy Badami&#39;s comments on edge cases around submitting a Payment&#xA;message to a merchant and then not receiving a timely response:&#xA;&#xA;I agree, it is messy.&#xA;&#xA;I&#39;m hesitant to try to specify One True Way of handling it in the&#xA;spec; I&#39;ve got a feeling that this might be a place where different&#xA;implementations might try different things, with the best&#xA;implementation winning.&#xA;&#xA;For example, if some future nifty-keen Bitcoin client is re-using an&#xA;old Invoice to send a monthly subscription payment and they can&#39;t&#xA;contact the paymentURI, then the right thing is probably for it to&#xA;retry once a day for three or four days and if they all fail then give&#xA;up and tell the user that the service is no longer in business (or&#xA;changed their paymentURI without leaving behind a redirect).&#xA;&#xA;If it has a single-use Invoice created a minute or two ago, the right&#xA;logic might be:&#xA;  + If the paymentURI is completely non-responsive, just error and&#xA;tell the user &#34;payment failed&#34;&#xA;  + If connected to the paymentURI and payment sent, but disconnected&#xA;before receiving a response, then try to send-to-self the coins to&#xA;cancel payment.&#xA;&#xA;Again, I&#39;m not at all sure that is the best way to handle it;&#xA;implementors have the right incentives to give their users the best&#xA;user experience, so I feel comfortable leaving the spec fuzzy for now.&#xA;&#xA;-- &#xA;--&#xA;Gavin Andresen</html></oembed>