Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A20DB1B for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 16:23:17 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail.sldev.cz (mail.sldev.cz [51.254.7.247]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C38C5101 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 16:23:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sldev.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5125EE5A3; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 16:43:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sldev.cz Received: from mail.sldev.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fi5hUc-vZKoD; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 16:43:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tetra.site (unknown [10.8.8.107]) by mail.sldev.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ABD7AE4FE; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 16:43:28 +0000 (UTC) To: Thomas Voegtlin , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion References: <0d405f5d-c0a4-bad7-b6c3-08ba4424bf17@satoshilabs.com> <8b4831a4-791e-c03e-baa4-16d9e5ead442@electrum.org> From: Pavol Rusnak Message-ID: <84f4a4b8-fcbd-433b-9556-174ec5475f61@satoshilabs.com> Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 18:23:13 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8b4831a4-791e-c03e-baa4-16d9e5ead442@electrum.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal: Extended serialization format for BIP-32 wallets X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 16:23:17 -0000 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