summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/63/79a2c31e326d9b25383de5ffa48fc53850d5af
blob: fb3f05e4f9e8fa74d5beec8d24e9387d685bb6ea (plain)
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
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <thomasv1@gmx.de>) id 1WTAkb-0004xq-7h
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Thu, 27 Mar 2014 13:53:45 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmx.de
	designates 212.227.15.15 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=212.227.15.15; envelope-from=thomasv1@gmx.de;
	helo=mout.gmx.net; 
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1WTAkY-00057u-MZ
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Thu, 27 Mar 2014 13:53:45 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.27] ([84.101.32.222]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003)
	with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M6jIK-1XEglg0Dhs-00wY6e for
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:53:36 +0100
Message-ID: <53342D5F.7090309@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:53:35 +0100
From: Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv1@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
References: <CANEZrP2hbBVGqytmXR1rAcVama4ONnR586Se-Ch=dsxOzy2O4w@mail.gmail.com>	<53340999.807@gmx.de>	<CAJna-HhmFya+3W67qQt0wMhW=B4vJvwdkr-5WnU+KEaKq7uaUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<5334144A.9040600@gmx.de> <53342B3E.3050404@gk2.sk>
In-Reply-To: <53342B3E.3050404@gk2.sk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:/MABQAq8K/A/rmJlM1kqE1hmqp0fhbP14a2Tpl3Rhefr8U9JZfm
	CnrA9Hiu5NETmRL9Wes4sx2kLzw5JlYPr0WA5UL/Sf+gqq+vPUjao3VpAKKysessuTRkhBF
	lUSSz8cV51prWFkr397vgxkR6a7eKwcirYdt5ot5aW0v6tEVxRHqPHssQrhX0myKLIKwoeI
	RiLwMkAx7HV1r+Rhx0ZVQ==
X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
	no trust [212.227.15.15 listed in list.dnswl.org]
	-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
	sender-domain
	0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(thomasv1[at]gmx.de)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in
	digit (thomasv1[at]gmx.de)
X-Headers-End: 1WTAkY-00057u-MZ
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 13:53:45 -0000



Le 27/03/2014 14:44, Pavol Rusnak a écrit :
> On 03/27/2014 01:06 PM, Thomas Voegtlin wrote:
>> Yes, I was planning to increase the number of available unused addresses
>> to 10 or 20 in the bip32 version of Electrum.
>
> Also, we'd need to specify a "gap limit" for accounts as well. In TREZOR
> we currently use 0, which means that the scan will stop as soon as we
> hit first account with no transaction history (meaning that its first
> X=10 addresses are unused).
>

I agree with that. I was planning to do the same (no gap)

Note: Maybe we could just look at the first address of each account, 
instead of the first 10 ?