📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23
📝 Original message:I built such a merchant system handing out BIP32 addresses.
The gap size problem does not arise there since such a system has to have an extra database keeping track of requests, so there is no added cost of storing the key coordinates used by them. A scan is not needed the keys can be accessed at random order.
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 23.04.2014, at 21:00, Tier Nolan <tier.nolan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Pavol Rusnak <stick at gk2.sk> wrote:
>
> > Setting the gap limit to high is just a small extra cost in that case.
>
> Not if you have 100 accounts on 10 different devices.
>
> I meant for a merchant with a server that is handing out hundreds of addresses.
>
> The point is to have a single system that is compatible over a large number of systems.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/693f3869/attachment.html>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/693f3869/attachment.sig>;
Tamas Blummer [ARCHIVE] /
npub1cc…ex8m8
2023-06-07 17:17:55
in reply to nevent1q…gtg6
Author Public Key
npub1ccegg9n9lnx6huppxg43m95488yur7pfemkn3pz0agjws5ffvtts0ex8m8Published at
2023-06-07 17:17:55Event JSON
{
"id": "c33c43ba7b219be36a577cc701911c0ffe4c3daeec0259d85868332a2e15dae3",
"pubkey": "c632841665fccdabf021322b1d969539c9c1f829ceed38844fea24e8512962d7",
"created_at": 1686151075,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3d6a81230db6ab232d8356d3ea7e609f18aff1b8f11502ea70755e81b0de88f9",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"cac831d3ea1bc6a9033a6f747deff18d197b6a251b1e40454fc6c268672717cf",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"eb7ca795057ca7cabde6f541c741e661d013414934e5934c2e04c6677625c99a"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-04-23\n📝 Original message:I built such a merchant system handing out BIP32 addresses. \n\nThe gap size problem does not arise there since such a system has to have an extra database keeping track of requests, so there is no added cost of storing the key coordinates used by them. A scan is not needed the keys can be accessed at random order.\n\nTamas Blummer\nhttp://bitsofproof.com\n\nOn 23.04.2014, at 21:00, Tier Nolan \u003ctier.nolan at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 7:46 PM, Pavol Rusnak \u003cstick at gk2.sk\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e \u003e Setting the gap limit to high is just a small extra cost in that case.\n\u003e \n\u003e Not if you have 100 accounts on 10 different devices.\n\u003e \n\u003e I meant for a merchant with a server that is handing out hundreds of addresses.\n\u003e \n\u003e The point is to have a single system that is compatible over a large number of systems.\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/693f3869/attachment.html\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 495 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140423/693f3869/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "189f54022d8060ba8581e2218b343d913ce58adc70da589a5e6cb78c85dcbb39f94fee71cf5e176ff6dacba98275ea7b257350085564fbea458597a7d8f1d878"
}