Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C3BC002D for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 23:11:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A18C40272 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 23:11:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 8A18C40272 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1JDzTOtc_-rE for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 23:11:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org B92ED400F3 Received: from mail-vs1-f47.google.com (mail-vs1-f47.google.com [209.85.217.47]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B92ED400F3 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 23:11:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vs1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 129so16706278vsq.8 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:11:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=wc5rweZnTCV33SB0d9vUjz1LRPl4b4mvscZD+NedqvU=; b=L3WnIT32EfqHDTTxihyhmCS0LjaaHTuYxaXZe6VnWrlrn3axoQLVp/3+umq6r1EG5g lQoPxIdFGb+V6oYgMVvJ2pSRz2RHHVEyPIUc+RNZ8bFdk9bjnSXeCRYBexgr+SoTkAz7 Pw3pp80vudpS3x1QlHKTKtTmBoEmKPjtPM4Eo6T1dgprBgbl6essZ/2b+R4cgo60yzE3 5iQ4ZUANQf9PyIyvhhCRrhGO2hLs+noyYdBCtp4DHP/w5/M9RvMkXdUtQNl68f4gxjX8 ti0MZummZ+bck9SkXfRWY+X/N1aU/qMzWTLHa6xuvZJG7uPxx3dxBwK5sM4QRi5hA77w fIFg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo1JplUf2niVmLVbdsWwrKEIzw7zslhT9IB44/7jc6CxrsKTMWoB mocF4xAcqu/KC9HKdykaRRhRWPlrYMqwXouqPyUAvuwFVIIHfw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR7/njpsiwGUztCj1BRtckZ4fnnN7UNSUjFBSlcF6wW1Y9W0js4fPE/4XYvqTrWTOJWPJwSlX1YWGAcwFlMI8zQ= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b804:0:b0:357:9077:2561 with SMTP id i4-20020a67b804000000b0035790772561mr13067505vsf.1.1660173106249; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:11:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220809130908.yykum37tre7um4j3@artanis> In-Reply-To: <20220809130908.yykum37tre7um4j3@artanis> From: Ryan Grant Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 23:11:10 +0000 Message-ID: To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Ali Sherief Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Regarding BIP322 edge cases X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 23:11:48 -0000 >> TODO: A way for the initial signer to delegate to another >> scriptPubKey; needed for better privacy and CoinJoin/Lightning >> compatibility I need more documentation to understand this motivation. On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 8:46 PM Ali Sherief via bitcoin-dev wrote: > In the case of the last TODO, related to delegation to another > scriptPubKey, I am not quite sure at the moment what to do about > it - perhaps you guys can place a MAST (two Merkle branches, to be > specific) - the first branch has the original signer's scriptPubKey, > the second branch contains the delegated signer's scriptPubKey. I don't understand this requirement, but it seems that whatever parties are involved can make signatures on the delegating and delegated keys.