<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2012-11-26&#xA;📝 Original message:On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Gavin Andresen &lt;gavinandresen at gmail.com&gt; wrote:&#xA;&gt; This is the next big &#34;lets all agree to do things the same way&#34; thing&#xA;&gt; I think we should tackle. I&#39;m particularly looking for feedback from&#xA;&gt; other bitcoin client developers, even if it is just a quick &#34;looks&#xA;&gt; reasonable, if everybody else is going to do it then I will&#xA;&gt; (eventually) too...&#34;&#xA;&#xA;Comments:&#xA;&#xA;1) Payment message should include ability to specify the transaction&#xA;_or_ a transaction id sent via normal means over the network.&#xA;&#xA;2) I think a significant bitcoin userbase will want to operate outside&#xA;the full root-CA chain.  Just look at https:// websites now.&#xA;Self-signed certs are quite common, because it is easier, while being&#xA;more secure than http://&#xA;&#xA;So some provision for self-signed certs, a use case in wide use&#xA;elsewhere, or equivalent thereof, seems reasonable.&#xA;&#xA;-- &#xA;Jeff Garzik&#xA;exMULTI, Inc.&#xA;jgarzik at exmulti.com</html></oembed>