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
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F3471053
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 5 Sep 2015 11:17:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com (mail-wi0-f175.google.com
[209.85.212.175])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E887A4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 5 Sep 2015 11:17:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wicfx3 with SMTP id fx3so44800030wic.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 05 Sep 2015 04:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
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:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=zxJz41mKw1yBvl5fAdzKZBHHCialfIlItA0icWcDZAA=;
b=XGIoiRsh5CRNM8Nrc2SV3ey8g3EX240MkU6/aGeBguvfB1HRBwNSDrRLwBYdpPaCsw
FVIyD5qdNeHPLOMocCOlIkU7+QuYCFMIa0hjcX5c0ktEprraiRcIpofyJI8g56P8blEQ
2SQOTMjx5hf2uRem84V8GkACHMSWMmtnSOXwzf09fZQ5+Xycox8ZCtqoGaS3DEVLZCgB
7oZYTRwIaAmQuu7JDX+u2B4voizShiyZs4sq2syBXWxxUZcE6pYJ3ota4UujfegVu3wu
MTtsJBGvd0iV4LUhXF8YvYotjjqA5P34bHtJCwgYS6ZVmwDgcGU7oe0CEZbR+ljxN0lg
JnBQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnVL6fdKLbQLCzCKOZPItkpRB3hM/WPhPwiiDz++LF3N8jbPZfte5fbCthn5QCX19uhTCX6
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.182.7 with SMTP id ea7mr16477922wic.58.1441451872900;
Sat, 05 Sep 2015 04:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.37.5 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Sep 2015 04:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.37.5 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Sep 2015 04:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55E9D980.5020901@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org>
References: <CAHabJ+N3Tr5FtStH6Msmj3d8EsvjeTEV6FhSEiizLVs=5ZvCfw@mail.gmail.com>
<201509040006.06430.luke@dashjr.org>
<55E9D980.5020901@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 13:17:52 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDo7w9mSEDZ2Qf4i79HpgOQQjr2+Cyif4xbt=TKyDkvPdg@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Justus Ranvier <justus@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6048d8d86ad1051efe2af5
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] RFC: HD Bitmessage address derivation based on
BIP-43
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2015 11:17:58 -0000
--047d7b6048d8d86ad1051efe2af5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Sep 4, 2015 7:56 PM, "Justus Ranvier via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On 09/03/2015 07:06 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > Since BIP 43 is still a draft, I propose modifying it to refer non-
> > Bitcoin purpose codes to the SLIP repository:
> > https://doc.satoshilabs.com/slips/
>
> What benefit is created by delegating the BIP-43 namespace management to
> that company in particular?
>
> BIP-43 as it is currently composed provides the convenient feature of
> purpose codes matching the BIP number. Moving purpose codes to a
> separate namespace add complexity to its usage for no discernible benefit.
The "namespace" defined in BIP43 is acceptable. BIP44's is not:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0044.mediawiki#Registered_coin_types
It defines a centralized registry controlld by a single company instead of
having a way for different companies (or p2p chains like namecoin?) to
maintain competing registries.
Even better, it could use a code deterministically generated from the chain
ID (the hash of the genesis block), completely removing the need for a
registry in the first place.
> --
> Justus Ranvier
> Open Bitcoin Privacy Project
> http://www.openbitcoinprivacyproject.org/
> justus@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org
> E7AD 8215 8497 3673 6D9E 61C4 2A5F DA70 EAD9 E623
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
--047d7b6048d8d86ad1051efe2af5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On Sep 4, 2015 7:56 PM, "Justus Ranvier via bitcoin-dev" <<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linu=
xfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On 09/03/2015 07:06 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
> > Since BIP 43 is still a draft, I propose modifying it to refer no=
n-<br>
> > Bitcoin purpose codes to the SLIP repository:<br>
> >=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0<a href=3D"https://doc.satoshilabs.com/slips/"=
>https://doc.satoshilabs.com/slips/</a><br>
><br>
> What benefit is created by delegating the BIP-43 namespace management =
to<br>
> that company in particular?<br>
><br>
> BIP-43 as it is currently composed provides the convenient feature of<=
br>
> purpose codes matching the BIP number. Moving purpose codes to a<br>
> separate namespace add complexity to its usage for no discernible bene=
fit.<br>
The "namespace" defined in BIP43 is acceptable. BIP44's is no=
t: </p>
<p dir=3D"ltr"><a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0=
044.mediawiki#Registered_coin_types">https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/m=
aster/bip-0044.mediawiki#Registered_coin_types</a></p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">It defines a centralized registry controlld by a single comp=
any instead of having a way for different companies (or p2p chains like nam=
ecoin?) to maintain competing registries.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">Even better, it could use a code deterministically generated=
from the chain ID (the hash of the genesis block), completely removing the=
need for a registry in the first place.<br></p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">> --<br>
> Justus Ranvier<br>
> Open Bitcoin Privacy Project<br>
> <a href=3D"http://www.openbitcoinprivacyproject.org/">http://www.openb=
itcoinprivacyproject.org/</a><br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:justus@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org">justus@openbit=
coinprivacyproject.org</a><br>
> E7AD 8215 8497 3673 6D9E 61C4 2A5F DA70 EAD9 E623<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@l=
ists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
> <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-=
dev">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
><br>
</p>
--047d7b6048d8d86ad1051efe2af5--
|
