1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>) id 1WdDo6-0005tn-Hz
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 24 Apr 2014 07:10:54 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.213.178 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.213.178; envelope-from=pieter.wuille@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ig0-f178.google.com;
Received: from mail-ig0-f178.google.com ([209.85.213.178])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WdDo5-0004gM-TQ
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 24 Apr 2014 07:10:54 +0000
Received: by mail-ig0-f178.google.com with SMTP id hn18so545477igb.11
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 24 Apr 2014 00:10:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.85.37 with SMTP id e5mr1717509igz.43.1398323448626; Thu,
24 Apr 2014 00:10:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.127.243 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 00:10:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5358B51F.8010202@gmx.de>
References: <CANEZrP2hbBVGqytmXR1rAcVama4ONnR586Se-Ch=dsxOzy2O4w@mail.gmail.com>
<CAE-z3OUMp_uO07+_R_x2yRLbSCzK1J5isbVUYEY3KF4Tx16K2Q@mail.gmail.com>
<53581480.5060103@gk2.sk> <201404231944.14256.luke@dashjr.org>
<5358B51F.8010202@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 09:10:48 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBj68d5ZBDZ4uWvQYHMeq=bwTCaMNbwxfWGVL5MPh=7g2g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv1@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1WdDo5-0004gM-TQ
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] New BIP32 structure
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 07:10:54 -0000
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv1@gmx.de> wrote:
>> Why do clients need to use the features in BIP 64? If Electrum doesn't want to
>> use accounts, [...]
>
> To clarify:
> Electrum plans to have bip32 accounts; Multibit will not, afaik.
To clarify:
BIP64 has a much stricter definition for accounts than BIP32.
In BIP32, it is not well specified what accounts are used for. They
can be used for "subwallets", "receive accounts" (as in bitcoind's
account feature), "recurring payments", part of a chain used as
multisig addresses, ... determined individually for each index.
In BIP64, they are strictly used for subwallets, and can't be used by
anything else.
--
Pieter
|
