MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5735FC99.5090001@satoshilabs.com>
References: <5735D3A4.7090608@mycelium.com> <5735EC17.5040901@satoshilabs.com>
	<CACq0ZD4BvvCryYmO-J9Rof-ogQJ1wNLgmUEU596nuTH=-U8Hag@mail.gmail.com>
	<5735FC99.5090001@satoshilabs.com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 09:59:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CACq0ZD7mLCaoGpcVEp7NfW=6nsEA39tZp+G8oeySygMEyhuwQA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aaron Voisine <voisine@gmail.com>
To: Pavol Rusnak <stick@satoshilabs.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0b8ce40f5f390532bc33f8
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bip44 extension for P2SH/P2WSH/...
Precedence: list

--94eb2c0b8ce40f5f390532bc33f8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

This scheme is independent of the number of accounts. It works with BIP44
as well as BIP43 purpose 0, or any other BIP43 purpose/layout. Instead of
overloading the account index to indicate the type of address, you use the
chain index, which is already being used to indicate what the specific
address chain is to be used for, i.e. receive vs change addresses.


Aaron Voisine
co-founder and CEO
breadwallet <http://breadwallet.com>

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Pavol Rusnak <stick@satoshilabs.com> wrote:

> On 13/05/16 18:03, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> > I like the idea of specifying the type of address as a bit field flag.
> > 0x80000000 is already used to specify hardened derivation, so 0x40000000
> > would be the next available to specify witness addresses. This is
> > compatible with existing accounts and wallet layouts.
>
> I think this is over-optimization. What is the advantage of
>
> m/0'/0x40000000 instead of m/whatever'/0 ?
>
> But this is off-topic anyway, as we are discussing multiple-accounts per
> wallet layout here, not one-account-per-wallet design.
>
> --
> Best Regards / S pozdravom,
>
> Pavol "stick" Rusnak
> SatoshiLabs.com
>

--94eb2c0b8ce40f5f390532bc33f8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">This scheme is independent of the number of accounts. It w=
orks with BIP44 as well as BIP43 purpose 0, or any other BIP43 purpose/layo=
ut. Instead of overloading the account index to indicate the type of addres=
s, you use the chain index, which is already being used to indicate what th=
e specific address chain is to be used for, i.e. receive vs change addresse=
s.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br clear=3D"all"><div><div class=3D"gma=
il_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div dir=3D"ltr">=
<div><br>Aaron Voisine</div><div>co-founder and CEO<br><a href=3D"http://br=
eadwallet.com" target=3D"_blank">breadwallet</a></div></div></div></div></d=
iv></div></div></div>
<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Pavol Rusna=
k <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:stick@satoshilabs.com" target=3D"=
_blank">stick@satoshilabs.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D=
"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding=
-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">On 13/05/16 18:03, Aaron Voisine wrote:<br>
&gt; I like the idea of specifying the type of address as a bit field flag.=
<br>
&gt; 0x80000000 is already used to specify hardened derivation, so 0x400000=
00<br>
&gt; would be the next available to specify witness addresses. This is<br>
&gt; compatible with existing accounts and wallet layouts.<br>
<br>
</span>I think this is over-optimization. What is the advantage of<br>
<br>
m/0&#39;/0x40000000 instead of m/whatever&#39;/0 ?<br>
<br>
But this is off-topic anyway, as we are discussing multiple-accounts per<br=
>
wallet layout here, not one-account-per-wallet design.<br>
<div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><br>
--<br>
Best Regards / S pozdravom,<br>
<br>
Pavol &quot;stick&quot; Rusnak<br>
SatoshiLabs.com<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

--94eb2c0b8ce40f5f390532bc33f8--