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
|
Return-Path: <stick@satoshilabs.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3E31AA6
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 6 Sep 2017 17:03:03 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail.sldev.cz (mail.sldev.cz [51.254.7.247])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7816A235
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 6 Sep 2017 17:03:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mail.sldev.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F2DEAF1;
Wed, 6 Sep 2017 17:23:12 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sldev.cz
Received: from mail.sldev.cz ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (mail.sl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id vBjVLi8WR43q; Wed, 6 Sep 2017 17:23:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from tetra.site (unknown [10.8.8.107])
by mail.sldev.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A5F8BE519;
Wed, 6 Sep 2017 17:23:11 +0000 (UTC)
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv@electrum.org>
References: <43636dd6-ab9e-da15-59ae-f31eb11ff7ff@electrum.org>
<201709051303.43410.luke@dashjr.org>
From: Pavol Rusnak <stick@satoshilabs.com>
Message-ID: <64a6ae8c-f553-8930-50b0-5681ab7ca75b@satoshilabs.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 19:02:59 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201709051303.43410.luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled
version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal: bip32 version bytes for segwit scripts
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 17:03:03 -0000
On 05/09/17 19:03, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I think it makes more sense to use a child number field for this purpose.
> It seems desirable to use the same seed for all different script formats...
If I were designing the serialization format today, I would drop the
fingerprint and expand child number to full BIP32 path. Good thing is
that we already have depth, so we know how long the BIP32 path would be.
So I suggest the following:
4 byte: version bytes
1 byte: depth
depth * 4 bytes: bip32 path
32 bytes
33 bytes
--
Best Regards / S pozdravom,
Pavol "stick" Rusnak
CTO, SatoshiLabs
|
