Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YBUd4-0007eF-JG for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:33:27 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com designates 209.85.214.177 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.177; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com; helo=mail-ob0-f177.google.com; Received: from mail-ob0-f177.google.com ([209.85.214.177]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YBUd0-0000sW-UJ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:33:26 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f177.google.com with SMTP id uy5so9776613obc.8 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 12:33:17 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=dvit681W5PHsmJs1mcYfMR9QEXov/Kv7pC2V1iBuElU=; b=HTHWcPIwEqgwvtjzagpTQXAWXkvdQPl6iSU99SvVL91fPb98v2cV7uiksc+T3FqkCl HbBqgsrNmBsfa0esldco3r0v/zfn4WO5emXCsqojaiRRb3iEzGFlXPV7ALhc137axyh6 ZLSoAfnONxw7cNaW5QkpINMstuOb6dnBQ5aUBCE7siOyA2YJjpXGq2467yldQ2JxGUWR rIK6EoRhT8K3xVWXpKKSsGk2Mw3VcHN81T7vHUdKgfdq9XlF0NktN2dyHasRH/zElq8f pNhcTEzw5rMahhpHgMtIc+vpD3c8nw+HuexQy8sTy65gjv+6IHOAS77wfltN62LBRkyJ 0dLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnLJarKuQm31f+0A//Nsf30Nwj6f1ciu5t7D00YgtBxHhD2LbAiWitHSiG4d9Rm/TxPh2+U X-Received: by 10.60.52.72 with SMTP id r8mr3664038oeo.75.1421267597475; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 12:33:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.209.9 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 12:32:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jeff Garzik Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 15:32:57 -0500 Message-ID: To: Ruben de Vries Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11333436475b05050ca2a668 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) 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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -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: 1YBUd0-0000sW-UJ Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions 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: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:33:27 -0000 --001a11333436475b05050ca2a668 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sounds like this warrants a micro-BIP just to get everybody on the same page. On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Ruben de Vries wrote: > For p2sh multisig TXs the order of the public keys affect the hash and > there doesn't seem to be an agreed upon way of sorting the public keys. > > If there would be a standard (recommended) way of sorting the public keys > that would make it easier for services that implement some form of multis= ig > to be compatible with each other without much hassle and making it possib= le > to import keys from one service to another. > > I'm not suggesting forcing the order, just setting a standard to > recommend, there doesn't seem to be much reason for (new) services to not > follow that recommendation. > > Ryan from BitPay broad this up before ( > https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/32092958/) and in > bitcore they've implemented lexicographical sorting on the hex of the > public key. > In a short search I can't find any other library that has a sorting > function, let alone using it by default, so bitcore is currently my only > reference. > > > =E2=80=8BRuben de Vries > =E2=80=8BCTO, BlockTrail > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- > New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. > GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. > Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. > Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > --=20 Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ --001a11333436475b05050ca2a668 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sounds like this warrants a micro-BIP just to get everybod= y on the same page.


On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Ruben de Vries <ruben@blocktrail.com> wrote:
For p2sh multisig TXs the order of the public keys affect t= he hash and there doesn't seem to be an agreed upon way of sorting the = public keys.

If there would be a standard (recommended) way of sorting= the public keys that would make it easier for services that implement some= form of multisig to be compatible with each other without much hassle and = making it possible to import keys from one service to another.

I'm= not suggesting forcing the order, just setting a standard to recommend, th= ere doesn't seem to be much reason for (new) services to not follow tha= t recommendation.

Ryan from BitPay broad this up before (https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/32092958/) and in b= itcore they've implemented lexicographical sorting on the hex of the pu= blic key.
In a short search I can't find any other library that has a s= orting function, let alone using it by default, so bitcore is currently my = only reference.


=E2=80=8BRuben de Vries
=E2=80=8BCTO, BlockTrail

-----------------------------------------------------------------------= -------
New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.
GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.
Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/s= fu/gigenet
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment




--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open sourc= e evangelist
BitPay, Inc. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://bitpay.com/
--001a11333436475b05050ca2a668--