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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <voisine@gmail.com>) id 1Wdo8L-0002XT-Rw
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 25 Apr 2014 21:58:13 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.178 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.178; envelope-from=voisine@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ob0-f178.google.com;
Received: from mail-ob0-f178.google.com ([209.85.214.178])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Wdo8K-0001Iv-Vh
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 25 Apr 2014 21:58:13 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id wn1so4890224obc.23
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 25 Apr 2014 14:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.144.194 with SMTP id so2mr8931690obb.31.1398463087641;
Fri, 25 Apr 2014 14:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.45.231 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 14:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP0+SBMpjnQwbspZ_A6ZA8GepwW9G98AZU2jfWHuGCtEHg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ljdd29$522$1@ger.gmane.org>
<1398437607.23028.110362141.03111A2A@webmail.messagingengine.com>
<CAAS2fgRiXdOBN2gVZ0Xh4kBeOKiS80AjD5+VxJEut9nWt-0WUg@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP0+SBMpjnQwbspZ_A6ZA8GepwW9G98AZU2jfWHuGCtEHg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 14:58:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CACq0ZD64RAw+p+HH=OvHzURg+pJrpRXfJ8jZ3q9v-MF99=mP6Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aaron Voisine <voisine@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(voisine[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1Wdo8K-0001Iv-Vh
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP32 "wallet structure" in use? Remove
it?
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: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 21:58:14 -0000
On github I commented on the BIP43 pull request about adding a
"purpose" of 0' which would correspond to the BIP32 recommended tree
structure for a single account wallet. (m/0'/chain) This will allow
for backwards compatibility and interoperability at least for existing
single account BIP32 implementations like my own. The only issue is
that it would involve a new BIP, and it wouldn't follow the BIP43
recommendation of using the BIP number as the "purpose number", unless
I can get BIP0. :)
Aaron
There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
government working for you -- Will Rodgers
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> I generally agree, but I wonder how popular cloning wallets between devices
> will be in future. Right now if someone wants to have a wallet shared
> between Hive, blockchain.info and Bitcoin Wallet for Android, we just tell
> them they're out of luck and they need to pick one, or split their funds up
> manually.
>
> But probably a lot of people would like to use different UI's to access the
> same wallets. Sharing key trees is a part of that, though full blown wallet
> metadata sync would also be needed.
>
> So I guess we're going to end up with some kind of fairly complex
> compatibility matrix. But I agree it may be unavoidable.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
|
