summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/a7/0c7433c29597d8e7d0c7a88f4f9e60d425e3a0
blob: 134eb69e44aadcb580097c992a6f6f08b5306daf (plain)
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
84
85
86
87
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1YIaoh-0001s0-8T for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:34:47 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org
	designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=80.91.229.3;
	envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org;
	helo=plane.gmane.org; 
Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1YIaog-0000DZ-78
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:34:47 +0000
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1YIaoZ-00038f-3J for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 03 Feb 2015 11:34:39 +0100
Received: from f052086198.adsl.alicedsl.de ([78.52.86.198])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Tue, 03 Feb 2015 11:34:39 +0100
Received: from andreas by f052086198.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1
	(Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Tue, 03 Feb 2015 11:34:39 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
From: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 11:34:31 +0100
Message-ID: <maq87n$dbp$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <CAG86ZOxYh+=rny3sPHeJ0qs6R=5frLXERKmwhVECGHo7tkrz3w@mail.gmail.com>	<CANEZrP3Tuw3mJLSuoOA4iOmg6u9sdh-E5NNm_FgdYs3Mx39znA@mail.gmail.com>	<manr4t$c1a$1@ger.gmane.org>	<54CF74A5.3050304@gk2.sk>	<mao0u5$gbu$1@ger.gmane.org>	<54CF9016.5070206@gk2.sk>	<map3bi$pkf$2@ger.gmane.org>
	<54D014DB.50404@gk2.sk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: f052086198.adsl.alicedsl.de
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <54D014DB.50404@gk2.sk>
X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/)
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 SPF_HELO_PASS          SPF: HELO matches SPF record
	1.1 DKIM_ADSP_ALL          No valid author signature,
	domain signs all mail
	-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1YIaog-0000DZ-78
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Export format for xpub
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: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:34:47 -0000

On 02/03/2015 01:22 AM, Pavol Rusnak wrote:

> Hm, let me put the questions the other way around:
> 
> What gap limit should a wallet use if it encounters h=bip32?

It should follow the spec. I know BIP32-hierarchy is short on gap
limits, which is why (amongst other reasons) I expect
BIP32-hierarchy-based wallets migrate to a better standard at some time.

> What h value should I use for myTREZOR wallets? Which is essentially a
> BIP44 wallet that produces h=bip32 xpubs with gap limit 20 ...

If it follows BIP32, h=bip32 is fine.