|
TangibleCryptography (OP)
|
 |
June 14, 2012, 01:51:23 PM |
|
I would like to get my next x deposit addresses for MtGox or other exchange. Currently I am having customers deposit to my wallet and then I transfer to the exchange where I can clear at the best price. I would like instead to dynamically have the customer deposit to my exchange account (at the exchange with best price). To do that I need in advance the next deposit address. The best method would be some API call: http://some-exchange.com/API/GetDepositAddresswhich returns a new deposit address on each call. Does any exchange offer functionality like this? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
|
|
June 14, 2012, 11:25:06 PM |
|
How will you know a payment was received? Monitoring the address using a third-party service, like BlockChain.info perhaps?
I wonder if any clients (e.g., Armory, Electrum or Multibit) can do a sweep to your Mt. Gox of the transaction immediately on 0/unconfirmed. That way you don't need to receive directly to Mt. Gox.
|
|
|
|
|
mav
|
|
June 14, 2012, 11:55:46 PM |
|
I also would like this feature to be part of gox merchant services so each payment can be individually tracked, preferably with a settable url callback when the balance at the address is changed.
|
|
|
|
|
rjk
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
1ngldh
|
|
June 15, 2012, 01:40:45 AM |
|
How will you know a payment was received? Monitoring the address using a third-party service, like BlockChain.info perhaps?
I wonder if any clients (e.g., Armory, Electrum or Multibit) can do a sweep to your Mt. Gox of the transaction immediately on 0/unconfirmed. That way you don't need to receive directly to Mt. Gox.
I could think of a way to do this. Just export an existing private key that belongs to a "Sweep To" address, and then import that address to MtGox. Since MtGox sweeps all imported keys for every transaction, that would solve the problem of actually getting the money to the exchange. Then, you would have to code your bot to detect when a deposit has been received by MtGox, and trigger a sale at market price. For the actual address the the customer gets, that would be generated using the API of the client, and funds received by each unique address would be swept into the address that was added to MtGox. |
|
|
|
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:02:40 AM |
|
MtGox sweeps all imported keys for every transaction, that would solve the problem of actually getting the money to the exchange.
Ha, ya! That works too. So a local bitcoin client will still see the payment, but as soon as Mt. Gox's sweep kicks in there will be another transfer, to your Mt. Gox account. All done automatically. That probably would work just fine! (Except for the part about adding all the keys to Mt. Gox, which is a manual process, for now.) |
|
|
|
|
TangibleCryptography (OP)
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:06:43 AM |
|
Ha, ya! That works too. So a local bitcoin client will still see the payment, but as soon as Mt. Gox's sweep kicks in there will be another transfer, to your Mt. Gox account. All done automatically. That probably would work just fine! (Except for the part about adding all the keys to Mt. Gox, which is a manual process, for now.)
Looks like you can add private keys via the API so that works. Now I just need to get other exchanges to implement similar capabilities and I can dynamically give sellers an address to the exchange where I will get the best execution. Thanks Stephen & rjk |
|
|
|
|
rjk
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
1ngldh
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:10:50 AM |
|
MtGox sweeps all imported keys for every transaction, that would solve the problem of actually getting the money to the exchange.
Ha, ya! That works too. So a local bitcoin client will still see the payment, but as soon as Mt. Gox's sweep kicks in there will be another transfer, to your Mt. Gox account. All done automatically. That probably would work just fine! (Except for the part about adding all the keys to Mt. Gox, which is a manual process, for now.) No, re-read it - what I meant was that there would only be one address added to MtGox, and all the generated addresses would be swept by the client. You would probably have to use Armory for this, or write it into a script that talks to bitcoind. So it would go something like this: Unique address per client
Unique address per client
Unique address per client
Unique address per client
Unique address per client >>sweep by TC's software>> Single address that is added to MtGox >>autosweep performed by MtGox upon deposit>>
Unique address per client
Unique address per client
Unique address per client |
|
|
|
notme
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:12:07 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TangibleCryptography (OP)
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:12:47 AM |
|
rjk the problem with that is I have found that not all miners/pools will include a tx which uses a 0-confirm tx as its input. They should but they don't.
I lock in prices at the 0-confirm so the faster I can get the funds to the exchange the less exchange rate risk I suffer.
|
|
|
|
|
rjk
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
1ngldh
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:13:42 AM |
|
Wasn't API v0 phased out? I thought the current API version was 1, but maybe you could run that command and see what happens. |
|
|
|
|
TangibleCryptography (OP)
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:14:45 AM |
|
How the hell did I miss that? I looked over the API multiple times. Thanks. Now I just need to convince bitfloor, campbx, and intersango to implement the same feature. Should be easy right?  |
|
|
|
|
notme
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:23:36 AM |
|
Wasn't API v0 phased out? I thought the current API version was 1, but maybe you could run that command and see what happens. API v0 is still supported, but the old method of authenticating was phased out. I didn't see an equivalent method in v1, but I didn't look to hard. My trading bot still uses v0 just fine (although he's off now since he just trades the spread, and I want to see where this is going). |
|
|
|
|
TangibleCryptography (OP)
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:26:20 AM |
|
Wasn't API v0 phased out? I thought the current API version was 1, but maybe you could run that command and see what happens. API v0 is still supported, but the old method of authenticating was phased out. I didn't see an equivalent method in v1, but I didn't look to hard. My trading bot still uses v0 just fine (although he's off now since he just trades the spread, and I want to see where this is going). Good to know because strangely there is no equivelent in v1. I will code something up real quick and see if the API returns to me multiple deposit addresses. |
|
|
|
|
|
runlinux
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:27:01 AM |
|
once zipconf gets up and running, you can use the API to create unique addresses for the supported exchanges and instantly get your funds there and ready to spend.
|
|
|
|
|
TangibleCryptography (OP)
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:28:40 AM |
|
once zipconf gets up and running, you can use the API to create unique addresses for the supported exchanges and instantly get your funds there and ready to spend.
Interesting. How is zipconf going to be monetized? If the cost is higher than the expected move in ~1 hour based on historical volatility it would be more expensive in the long run to get it there quicker. |
|
|
|
|
|
runlinux
|
|
June 15, 2012, 02:32:07 AM |
|
Beats me how they do it. Gotta me some pixie dust and awesomeness though.
|
|
|
|
|
