đ
Original date posted:2017-09-07
đ Original message:OutputType byte solution is nearly equivalent to {x,y,z} and adds redundant
data. Implementations could erroneously (maliciously) assign the wrong
output type for the given purpose field.
We could reduce the scope of this improvement to BIP43, as suggested by
Thomas. BIP32-generic wallets may implement something else.
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Pavol Rusnak via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On 07/09/17 06:29, Thomas Voegtlin via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > A solution is still needed to wallets who do not wish to use BIP43
>
> What if we added another byte field OutputType for wallets that do not
> follow BIP43?
>
> 0x00 - P2PKH output type
> 0x01 - P2WPKH-in-P2SH output type
> 0x02 - native Segwit output type
>
> Would that work for you?
>
> The question is whether this field should be present only if depth==0x00
> or at all times. What is your suggestion, Thomas?
>
> --
> Best Regards / S pozdravom,
>
> Pavol "stick" Rusnak
> CTO, SatoshiLabs
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--
-Kabuto
PGP Fingerprint: 1A83 4A96 EDE7 E286 2C5A B065 320F B934 A79B 6A99
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170907/e1d48d43/attachment-0001.html>;
Kabuto Samourai [ARCHIVE] /
npub1f3âŚpx7uy
2023-06-07 18:05:32
in reply to nevent1qâŚzn34
Author Public Key
npub1f3xpeyllrkdy9250q8n8dpn8tnh7v5y8n735szj8qegx7z62lleqzpx7uyPublished at
2023-06-07 18:05:32Event JSON
{
"id": "0b0d05e64e4d187e4aecb2569aea830da4733007308f6cc09ed94f87ad60d539",
"pubkey": "4c4c1c93ff1d9a42aa8f01e67686675cefe650879fa3480a4706506f0b4afff2",
"created_at": 1686161132,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"8b6c82e376bdda93cb2f70dd4782d9cc9d7453907841b893f7135515b4f67b4c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"bbe315614d47130a56253b54f25e5ace1a1bd5778cd4b5cf62951937634a131e",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"7631397e469f47f3535567311f5f7c17129e0ff2cb253df015e3d92ddfd92c63"
]
],
"content": "đ
Original date posted:2017-09-07\nđ Original message:OutputType byte solution is nearly equivalent to {x,y,z} and adds redundant\ndata. Implementations could erroneously (maliciously) assign the wrong\noutput type for the given purpose field.\n\nWe could reduce the scope of this improvement to BIP43, as suggested by\nThomas. BIP32-generic wallets may implement something else.\n\nOn Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Pavol Rusnak via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On 07/09/17 06:29, Thomas Voegtlin via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e \u003e A solution is still needed to wallets who do not wish to use BIP43\n\u003e\n\u003e What if we added another byte field OutputType for wallets that do not\n\u003e follow BIP43?\n\u003e\n\u003e 0x00 - P2PKH output type\n\u003e 0x01 - P2WPKH-in-P2SH output type\n\u003e 0x02 - native Segwit output type\n\u003e\n\u003e Would that work for you?\n\u003e\n\u003e The question is whether this field should be present only if depth==0x00\n\u003e or at all times. What is your suggestion, Thomas?\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e Best Regards / S pozdravom,\n\u003e\n\u003e Pavol \"stick\" Rusnak\n\u003e CTO, SatoshiLabs\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n\n\n\n-- \n-Kabuto\n\nPGP Fingerprint: 1A83 4A96 EDE7 E286 2C5A B065 320F B934 A79B 6A99\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170907/e1d48d43/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "23c6c08872099e16ef4eaa964ed71827735fe74c770ff2c6584903fbfdb90878c34fa1010a17c6a33c16c17e801f978fdf45b891528da9cd101f76e72fc03c5d"
}