Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1W5L3L-0001YU-RM for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:02:35 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1W5L3K-0003Rk-Vg for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:02:35 +0000 Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D47161080867; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:02:49 +0000 (UTC) From: "Luke-Jr" To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:02:27 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.6-gentoo; KDE/4.11.2; x86_64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201401202002.28141.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.6 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1W5L3K-0003Rk-Vg Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP0039: Final call X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:02:36 -0000 On Monday, January 20, 2014 5:42:37 PM slush wrote: > Hi all, > > during recent months we've reconsidered all comments which we received from > the community about our BIP39 proposal and we tried to meet all > requirements for such standard. Specifically the proposal now doesn't > require any specific wordlist, so every client can use its very own list of > preferred words. Generated mnemonic can be then applied to any other > BIP39-compatible client. Please follow current draft at > https://github.com/trezor/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki. How are they compatible if they could be using entirely different word lists?? > Because we're quickly moving towards release of Trezor firmware and we need > to finalize this part of the firmware, we're asking for the last comments > to current BIP39 draft. Maybe I'm missing something, but shouldn't this be a client-side thing, not implemented in the Trezor firmware at all?? O.o;; Luke