📅 Original date posted:2014-03-27
📝 Original message:Le 27/03/2014 12:30, Marek Palatinus a écrit :
> Ah, I forget to two things, which should be into the BIP as well:
>
> a) Gap factor for addresses; as Thomas mentioned, although some software
> can watch almost unlimited amount of unused addresses, this is serious
> concern for lightweight or server-based wallets like Electrum or
> myTREZOR. myTREZOR currently uses gap factor 10, which is (from my
> experience so far) quite sane for most of users.
Yes, I was planning to increase the number of available unused addresses
to 10 or 20 in the bip32 version of Electrum.
Related to this, here is another idea I would like to submit:
Instead of using a "gap limit" (maximal number of consecutive unused
addresses), I think we should get rid of the topology, and simply count
the number of unused addresses since the beginning of the sequence.
Indeed, the topology of the sequence of addresses is of no interest to
the user. Users often misinterpret "gap limit" as the "number of unused
addresses available", so I think we should just give them what they want
:) This is easier to understand, and it makes things more predictable,
because the wallet will always display the same number of unused
addresses (except when it is waiting for confirmations).
Thomas Voegtlin [ARCHIVE] /
npub10f…7ej47
2023-06-07 15:16:21
in reply to nevent1q…55k7
Author Public Key
npub10f96gqrsu4qpygfgvuvzce47aavjvql703egfde0l2hua8dzpszs67ej47Published at
2023-06-07 15:16:21Event JSON
{
"id": "e3aae60aa9b80010ce130e63cf554c02bbfc7987d8d92c4a1eb69b1e2130640d",
"pubkey": "7a4ba40070e54012212867182c66beef592603fe7c7284b72ffaafce9da20c05",
"created_at": 1686150981,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"d9ddea79394f356d989e65ab112610cc90e9929cf3c160da3cfe266aeba22200",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"f411417db04a008bfb8327f7100ce064fb5ce93848e8742b59d281aac8c449d2",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"7631397e469f47f3535567311f5f7c17129e0ff2cb253df015e3d92ddfd92c63"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-03-27\n📝 Original message:Le 27/03/2014 12:30, Marek Palatinus a écrit :\n\u003e Ah, I forget to two things, which should be into the BIP as well:\n\u003e\n\u003e a) Gap factor for addresses; as Thomas mentioned, although some software\n\u003e can watch almost unlimited amount of unused addresses, this is serious\n\u003e concern for lightweight or server-based wallets like Electrum or\n\u003e myTREZOR. myTREZOR currently uses gap factor 10, which is (from my\n\u003e experience so far) quite sane for most of users.\n\n\nYes, I was planning to increase the number of available unused addresses \nto 10 or 20 in the bip32 version of Electrum.\n\nRelated to this, here is another idea I would like to submit:\n\nInstead of using a \"gap limit\" (maximal number of consecutive unused \naddresses), I think we should get rid of the topology, and simply count \nthe number of unused addresses since the beginning of the sequence. \nIndeed, the topology of the sequence of addresses is of no interest to \nthe user. Users often misinterpret \"gap limit\" as the \"number of unused \naddresses available\", so I think we should just give them what they want \n:) This is easier to understand, and it makes things more predictable, \nbecause the wallet will always display the same number of unused \naddresses (except when it is waiting for confirmations).",
"sig": "746324b8336874a59dbc7936a68524a04c85572178112354bedc2c5de10df016e03cca01434534f04e3b6d48c5b09186de4fafd7ec92902c7076389129a558ad"
}