<p>Your work flow looks good, you should wait for a sufficient number of confirmations before  you transaction is fully accepted.  Not sure if you are delivering physical products or digital products,  that could impact how many confirms you choose to wait for.</p>

<p>Check out the following RPC API call:</p>

<pre><code> move &lt;fromaccount&gt; &lt;toaccount&gt; &lt;amount&gt; [minconf=1] [comment]  
 Move from one account in your wallet to another
</code></pre>

<p>This will allow you to move funds from one address to another within the same wallet.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-15T15:47:14.823Z
Thank you for you answer. I just did some tests with that API call, and it seems to to the work. In your opinion, is it better to keep the BTCs on the different addresses or to move them on a single address with the move API call?
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-15T16:22:20.887Z
I guess thats up to you and your reasoning behind storing them this way I could see arguments for both options. Doing so may link addresses that you have used to receive coin thus decreasing your (pseudo)anonymity.
Mark S.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-15T15:43:33.440Z
2013-12-15T15:43:33.440Z
Mark S.
<p>I'm developing a website that will be accepting BTC as a form of payment.</p>

<p>I (technically) know how to accept payments, I'm currently experimenting with the daemon and the Python-BitcoinRPC library and everything seems to work well.</p>

<p>What I'm asking here is what is, in the opinion of Bitcoins experts, the best way to actually handle the transactions.</p>

<p>I'm currently testing this method:</p>

<ul>
<li>Payment requested</li>
<li>Script asks the Bitcoin daemon to generate a new address</li>
<li>Show the new address to the user, ask to pay to that address</li>
<li>Script monitors the address</li>
<li>When the confirmed amount on that address is equal or greater that the amount to pay, mark the transaction as Payed</li>
<li>Transfer the amount from the address to another "main" address where all the payments end up</li>
</ul>

<p>Is this method good and secure? I'm particularly unsure about the last point.</p>

<p>Do you have any experience in this field?</p>

<p>Thank you in advance!</p>

<p>EDIT: I'm having some issues in sending BTC moved to a address from another address in local (without paying fees).</p>

<confirmations><payment><payment-processors>
How to accept BTC payments
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
# How to accept BTC payments

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-12-15)

I'm developing a website that will be accepting BTC as a form of payment.

I (technically) know how to accept payments, I'm currently experimenting with the daemon and the Python-BitcoinRPC library and everything seems to work well.

What I'm asking here is what is, in the opinion of Bitcoins experts, the best way to actually handle the transactions.

I'm currently testing this method:

* Payment requested
* Script asks the Bitcoin daemon to generate a new address
* Show the new address to the user, ask to pay to that address
* Script monitors the address
* When the confirmed amount on that address is equal or greater that the amount to pay, mark the transaction as Payed
* Transfer the amount from the address to another "main" address where all the payments end up

Is this method good and secure? I'm particularly unsure about the last point.

Do you have any experience in this field?

Thank you in advance!

EDIT: I'm having some issues in sending BTC moved to a address from another address in local (without paying fees).

**Tags:** confirmations, payment, payment-processors


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2013-12-15. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

Your work flow looks good, you should wait for a sufficient number of confirmations before you transaction is fully accepted. Not sure if you are delivering physical products or digital products, that could impact how many confirms you choose to wait for.

Check out the following RPC API call:

```
 move <fromaccount> <toaccount> <amount> [minconf=1] [comment]  
 Move from one account in your wallet to another

```

This will allow you to move funds from one address to another within the same wallet.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you for you answer. I just did some tests with that API call, and it seems to to the work. In your opinion, is it better to keep the BTCs on the different addresses or to move them on a single address with the move API call?  
> **username_1**: I guess thats up to you and your reasoning behind storing them this way I could see arguments for both options. Doing so may link addresses that you have used to receive coin thus decreasing your (pseudo)anonymity.  

---

