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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org>)
id 1YIR4G-00009A-C4 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:10:12 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org
designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender)
client-ip=80.91.229.3;
envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org;
helo=plane.gmane.org;
Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YIR4E-0000N9-CK
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:10:12 +0000
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org>)
id 1YIR47-0000aB-KC for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:10:03 +0100
Received: from e177084064.adsl.alicedsl.de ([85.177.84.64])
by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:10:03 +0100
Received: from andreas by e177084064.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1
(Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:10:03 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
From: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 01:05:06 +0100
Message-ID: <map3bi$pkf$2@ger.gmane.org>
References: <CAG86ZOxYh+=rny3sPHeJ0qs6R=5frLXERKmwhVECGHo7tkrz3w@mail.gmail.com> <CANEZrP3Tuw3mJLSuoOA4iOmg6u9sdh-E5NNm_FgdYs3Mx39znA@mail.gmail.com> <manr4t$c1a$1@ger.gmane.org> <54CF74A5.3050304@gk2.sk> <mao0u5$gbu$1@ger.gmane.org>
<54CF9016.5070206@gk2.sk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: e177084064.adsl.alicedsl.de
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <54CF9016.5070206@gk2.sk>
X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/)
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_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
1.1 DKIM_ADSP_ALL No valid author signature,
domain signs all mail
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
X-Headers-End: 1YIR4E-0000N9-CK
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Export format for xpub
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: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 00:10:12 -0000
On 02/02/2015 03:56 PM, Pavol Rusnak wrote:
> To me it seems more important to describe how addresses should be
> discovered (i.e. to scan xpub/0/i and xpub/1/j chains using gap limit G)
> instead of how the xpub was created/obtained (bip32 vs bip44).
>
> What do you thing about changing ?h=bip32 to something like
>
> ?t=01&g=20
>
> - t=01 meaning that chains 0 and 1 should be scanned (feel free to
> change "01" into any other descriptive string)
> - g=20 meaning that gap 20 should be used
I don't think that parameterizing will work, we can't predict future
BIPs. It's the same as for BIP43, in the end we agreed on just putting
the BIP number.
|
