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
|
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 <stick@gk2.sk>) id 1WTCp8-0003es-Pt
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:06:34 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from mail-ee0-f41.google.com ([74.125.83.41])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WTCp5-0003II-DP
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:06:34 +0000
Received: by mail-ee0-f41.google.com with SMTP id t10so3106263eei.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:06:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=0O3r1+6tjM/kGbVMryP7HKxELmGo+0Z+kVxxg1qylH0=;
b=jNWOh+RiStDrXFPFwf9yyLF8HGUwHPaMJY5rVjn5MFdQRnIQX5rPB0i/8Yq6qsWzIW
OJvc3E638xNOGVAXKgQ+FKWyOVUaKYvtUlwMMkIJxvz5DUQ4BgZrR+K7C1VMS5vXxP+7
k6SjFb1zPlrN17mGzTdDHjRep7vi+xwbdK3TeT6jpR3p0HmWZAMKd0oPL7axcle7hmyd
AYqFtlcIfws7vE4sK5XLPoo5kpF9Ex2RVohMGxenfVLHf4LwH2j0VEwWYKHCZrduFes4
7SwYYYAkukiKQywvi2p5APvHvrO42uzaNkS+3dDfRGHA84JP7POcxbodK3Ntvd+pQZiB
RPlg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnhqKhzlMXNIIVoME8DqtfIu7PDoKrfVHfMgA0lOC/Lh5PkoKyJtw68dm7vABC5zIbDYlh1
X-Received: by 10.15.34.197 with SMTP id e45mr747054eev.112.1395936383366;
Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tetra.site (nat-0-15.lam.cz. [80.92.242.254])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y7sm5263826eev.5.2014.03.27.09.06.21
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:06:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53344C7C.7020407@gk2.sk>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 17:06:20 +0100
From: Pavol Rusnak <stick@gk2.sk>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
References: <CANEZrP2hbBVGqytmXR1rAcVama4ONnR586Se-Ch=dsxOzy2O4w@mail.gmail.com> <F2C8C044-EF92-4CCE-9235-28CA7FCE3526@bitsofproof.com> <CAJHLa0PPAsBLgsy0vgPpUp=UzeR_fWUEzFb5+xtmODEk4MGPVQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJfRnm7V6fgcj=TMfa2ZTYWOKtE5aoUT1xnVtKUSyriB=6cagQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJfRnm7V6fgcj=TMfa2ZTYWOKtE5aoUT1xnVtKUSyriB=6cagQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
X-Headers-End: 1WTCp5-0003II-DP
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] New BIP32 structure
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:06:34 -0000
On 03/27/2014 04:57 PM, Allen Piscitello wrote:
> Don't most of these coins have a magic number already assigned that is
> unique? (0xD9B4BEF9 for Bitcoin, 0x0709110B for Testnet, FBC0XB6DB for
> Litecoin, etc...). This seems like a good candidate for identifying coins,
> and also supports Testnet cases well. Maybe there are some alts without
> such a magic number that might prevent that?
That magic number is something I find very unfortunate and superflous in
BIP-32 design. Its only purpose is to distinguish BIP-32 trees for
various altcoins, but it doesn't make sense at all once you start
storing various altcoins in the same tree using the proposed
/m/cointype/reserved'/account'/change/n scheme.
I would love to see that removed from BIP-32 and use always
0x0488B21E/0x0488ADE4 (xpub/xpriv), but that is for different discussion
I guess.
--
Best Regards / S pozdravom,
Pavol Rusnak <stick@gk2.sk>
|
