š
Original date posted:2021-09-01
š Original message:> ... I tried doing this with "application/bitcoin-psbt" back in
> 2019 but it was not accepted...
Thanks for this background.
Based on your experience, we should probably ignore the IANA then,
and just declare a few useful "mime types" (note the quotes) in a
new BIP. We can then agree inside the Bitcoin community on their
usage and meaning.
Anyone want to write that BIP and shepherd it? I can support you
but I'd rather write code.
---
@DocHEX || Coinkite || PGP: A3A31BAD 5A2A5B10
On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 07:46:55PM +0000, Andrew Chow wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> It would be nice to have mime types registered for Bitcoin things, but
> I'm not sure that it will be possible, at least not in the way that we
> would like. I tried doing this with "application/bitcoin-psbt" back in
> 2019 but it was not accepted. From that attempt, here is what I have
> learned:
>
> There are only a few accepted top level types, so we would not be able
> to use "bitcoin" as the top level (unless you want to submit an RFC to
> add a "bitcoin" top level). Of the available top level types,
> "application" is the most appropriate for Bitcoin.
>
> Next is the tree that the mime type should be in. The best would be the
> Standards tree, but it has some requirements that Bitcoin doesn't really
> meet. In order to be in the standards tree, the registration must be
> either associated with an IETF specification (so a RFC) or registered by
> a recognized standards related organization. Unfortunately the closest
> thing to a standards organization that Bitcoin has is the BIPs process,
> and that is not a really a standards organization nor is it recognized
> by IANA. So in order to register the mimetypes as Standards tree types,
> we would need to write an RFC, but this could be an independent
> submission (https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/independent/) rather than
> IETF-stream submission. I did not continue to pursue this because I
> didn't have the time.
>
> Another alternative would be to use the Vendor tree, but that would
> prefix the mimetype with "vnd." so it would end up being something like
> "application/vnd.bitcoin.psbt". I did not think this was an reasonable
> so I did not continue to pursue this avenue.
>
>
> Andrew Chow
>
> On 8/31/21 2:27 PM, Peter D. Gray via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > Hi list!
> >
> > I am proposing to register the following MIME (RFC 2046) media types with the IANA:
> >
> >
> > bitcoin/psbt
> >
> > - aka. a BIP-174 file, in binary
> > - does not make any claims about signed/unsigned status; lets leave that to the file
> >
> > bitcoin/txn
> >
> > - aka. wire-ready fully-signed transaction in binary
> >
> > bitcoin/uri
> >
> > - aka [BIP-21](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0021.mediawiki)
> > - could be just a bare bech32 or base58 payment address
> > - but can also encode amount, comments in URL args
> > - potentially interesting as a response to 402 - Payment required
> >
> >
> > Other thoughts
> >
> > - some mime-types are proposed in BIP-71 but those are unrelated to above, and never
> > seem to have been registered
> >
> > - for those who like to encode their binary as base64 or hex, that can be indicated
> > as "encoding=hex" or "encoding=base64" in the optional parameters, just like
> > "text/plain; encoding=utf-8" does. However, the default must be binary.
> >
> > - although the above are useful for web servers, they are also useful elsewhere and I
> > intend to use them in NFC (NDEF records) where a shorter length is critical.
> >
> > - I have no idea how easily IANA will accept these proposals.
> >
> > - current approved mime types: https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > ---
> > @DocHEX || Coinkite || PGP: A3A31BAD 5A2A5B10
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20210901/c6f95528/attachment.sig>;
Peter D. Gray [ARCHIVE] /
npub10vā¦t058y
2023-06-07 22:58:24
in reply to nevent1qā¦s0mf
Author Public Key
npub10vqyu8x3f0lfttk98xc28ppuyufaz4df8x4aspa9w9xz5z05snzq7t058yPublished at
2023-06-07 22:58:24Event JSON
{
"id": "8f849fd564109c1b9945183469787f7a7553f21125495bc62fac9d2081e83971",
"pubkey": "7b004e1cd14bfe95aec539b0a3843c2713d155a939abd807a5714c2a09f484c4",
"created_at": 1686178704,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"eb1cf347e9c5da4ec2d57252de4e2deed36b5f645fa2e5f04aaae8a322f5d53e",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2021-09-01\nš Original message:\u003e ... I tried doing this with \"application/bitcoin-psbt\" back in\n\u003e 2019 but it was not accepted...\n\nThanks for this background.\n\nBased on your experience, we should probably ignore the IANA then,\nand just declare a few useful \"mime types\" (note the quotes) in a\nnew BIP. We can then agree inside the Bitcoin community on their\nusage and meaning.\n\nAnyone want to write that BIP and shepherd it? I can support you\nbut I'd rather write code.\n\n---\n@DocHEX || Coinkite || PGP: A3A31BAD 5A2A5B10\n\nOn Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 07:46:55PM +0000, Andrew Chow wrote:\n\u003e Hi Peter,\n\u003e \n\u003e It would be nice to have mime types registered for Bitcoin things, but\n\u003e I'm not sure that it will be possible, at least not in the way that we\n\u003e would like. I tried doing this with \"application/bitcoin-psbt\" back in\n\u003e 2019 but it was not accepted. From that attempt, here is what I have\n\u003e learned:\n\u003e \n\u003e There are only a few accepted top level types, so we would not be able\n\u003e to use \"bitcoin\" as the top level (unless you want to submit an RFC to\n\u003e add a \"bitcoin\" top level). Of the available top level types,\n\u003e \"application\" is the most appropriate for Bitcoin.\n\u003e \n\u003e Next is the tree that the mime type should be in. The best would be the\n\u003e Standards tree, but it has some requirements that Bitcoin doesn't really\n\u003e meet. In order to be in the standards tree, the registration must be\n\u003e either associated with an IETF specification (so a RFC) or registered by\n\u003e a recognized standards related organization. Unfortunately the closest\n\u003e thing to a standards organization that Bitcoin has is the BIPs process,\n\u003e and that is not a really a standards organization nor is it recognized\n\u003e by IANA. So in order to register the mimetypes as Standards tree types,\n\u003e we would need to write an RFC, but this could be an independent\n\u003e submission (https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/independent/) rather than\n\u003e IETF-stream submission. I did not continue to pursue this because I\n\u003e didn't have the time.\n\u003e \n\u003e Another alternative would be to use the Vendor tree, but that would\n\u003e prefix the mimetype with \"vnd.\" so it would end up being something like\n\u003e \"application/vnd.bitcoin.psbt\". I did not think this was an reasonable\n\u003e so I did not continue to pursue this avenue.\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e Andrew Chow\n\u003e \n\u003e On 8/31/21 2:27 PM, Peter D. Gray via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e \u003e Hi list!\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e I am proposing to register the following MIME (RFC 2046) media types with the IANA:\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin/psbt\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - aka. a BIP-174 file, in binary\n\u003e \u003e - does not make any claims about signed/unsigned status; lets leave that to the file\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin/txn\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - aka. wire-ready fully-signed transaction in binary\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin/uri\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - aka [BIP-21](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0021.mediawiki)\n\u003e \u003e - could be just a bare bech32 or base58 payment address\n\u003e \u003e - but can also encode amount, comments in URL args\n\u003e \u003e - potentially interesting as a response to 402 - Payment required\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Other thoughts\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - some mime-types are proposed in BIP-71 but those are unrelated to above, and never\n\u003e \u003e seem to have been registered\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - for those who like to encode their binary as base64 or hex, that can be indicated\n\u003e \u003e as \"encoding=hex\" or \"encoding=base64\" in the optional parameters, just like\n\u003e \u003e \"text/plain; encoding=utf-8\" does. However, the default must be binary.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - although the above are useful for web servers, they are also useful elsewhere and I\n\u003e \u003e intend to use them in NFC (NDEF records) where a shorter length is critical.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - I have no idea how easily IANA will accept these proposals.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - current approved mime types: https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Thoughts?\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e ---\n\u003e \u003e @DocHEX || Coinkite || PGP: A3A31BAD 5A2A5B10\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e \u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e \u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \n\u003e \n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 488 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20210901/c6f95528/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "2d41f7fc8deb17d5b7c4169d1826636a86b6c12cfad1c4bba7604e0c5a973f770caa25fac9399afd6e0c373f7b31d2ec6e95889bc1d20ac9579dfbf3be0112d3"
}