path: root/b1/55be010e2fa8a3902616a0c4cdb10055117c93

Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <elombrozo@gmail.com>) id 1YBSFM-0002XN-KT
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:00:48 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.215.41 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.215.41; envelope-from=elombrozo@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-la0-f41.google.com; 
Received: from mail-la0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1YBSFJ-0006G5-OC
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:00:48 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f41.google.com with SMTP id hv19so9518185lab.0
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Wed, 14 Jan 2015 10:00:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.154.70 with SMTP id vm6mr5472513lbb.18.1421258439397;
	Wed, 14 Jan 2015 10:00:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.61.106 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 10:00:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.61.106 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 10:00:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1421257150.8969.4.camel@niftybox.net>
References: <CABETNRtquBWEZZ=jOcWojcgMTpjU5nWP9p74DArLxOXqqQT7og@mail.gmail.com>
	<1421257150.8969.4.camel@niftybox.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 10:00:39 -0800
Message-ID: <CABr1YTcDMhyT=3dbnSJnnBXnKCO-Cfbip7G+H9A9zVDmjEafHg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
To: devrandom <c1.sf-bitcoin@niftybox.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0115f5a46a16c8050ca0843f
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
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
	(elombrozo[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	1.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	-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: 1YBSFJ-0006G5-OC
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Ruben de Vries <ruben@blocktrail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public
 keys for p2sh multisig transactions
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: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:00:48 -0000

--089e0115f5a46a16c8050ca0843f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think everyone is pretty much following this standard now.

- Eric
On Jan 14, 2015 12:58 PM, "devrandom" <c1.sf-bitcoin@niftybox.net> wrote:

> At CryptoCorp we recommend to our customers that they sort
> lexicographically by the public key bytes of the leaf public keys.  i.e.
> the same as BitPay.
>
> On Wed, 2015-01-14 at 17:37 +0100, Ruben de Vries wrote:
> > For p2sh multisig TXs the order of the public keys affect the hash and
> > there doesn't seem to be an agreed upon way of sorting the public
> > keys.
> >
> >
> > If there would be a standard (recommended) way of sorting the public
> > keys that would make it easier for services that implement some form
> > of multisig to be compatible with each other without much hassle and
> > making it possible to import keys from one service to another.
> >
> >
> > I'm not suggesting forcing the order, just setting a standard to
> > recommend, there doesn't seem to be much reason for (new) services to
> > not follow that recommendation.
> >
> >
> > Ryan from BitPay broad this up before
> > (https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/32092958/) and in
> > bitcore they've implemented lexicographical sorting on the hex of the
> > public key.
> > In a short search I can't find any other library that has a sorting
> > function, let alone using it by default, so bitcore is currently my
> > only reference.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =E2=80=8BRuben de Vries
> > =E2=80=8BCTO, BlockTrail
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
> > New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.
> > GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashbur=
n.
> > Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.
> > Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant=
.
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet
> > _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development
> mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> --
> Miron / devrandom
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
> New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.
> GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn.
> Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.
> Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>

--089e0115f5a46a16c8050ca0843f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr">I think everyone is pretty much following this standard now.=
</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">- Eric</p>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Jan 14, 2015 12:58 PM, &quot;devrandom&quot; =
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:c1.sf-bitcoin@niftybox.net">c1.sf-bitcoin@niftybox.ne=
t</a>&gt; wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">At =
CryptoCorp we recommend to our customers that they sort<br>
lexicographically by the public key bytes of the leaf public keys.=C2=A0 i.=
e.<br>
the same as BitPay.<br>
<br>
On Wed, 2015-01-14 at 17:37 +0100, Ruben de Vries wrote:<br>
&gt; For p2sh multisig TXs the order of the public keys affect the hash and=
<br>
&gt; there doesn&#39;t seem to be an agreed upon way of sorting the public<=
br>
&gt; keys.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; If there would be a standard (recommended) way of sorting the public<b=
r>
&gt; keys that would make it easier for services that implement some form<b=
r>
&gt; of multisig to be compatible with each other without much hassle and<b=
r>
&gt; making it possible to import keys from one service to another.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I&#39;m not suggesting forcing the order, just setting a standard to<b=
r>
&gt; recommend, there doesn&#39;t seem to be much reason for (new) services=
 to<br>
&gt; not follow that recommendation.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Ryan from BitPay broad this up before<br>
&gt; (<a href=3D"https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/32092958=
/" target=3D"_blank">https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/3209=
2958/</a>) and in<br>
&gt; bitcore they&#39;ve implemented lexicographical sorting on the hex of =
the<br>
&gt; public key.<br>
&gt; In a short search I can&#39;t find any other library that has a sortin=
g<br>
&gt; function, let alone using it by default, so bitcore is currently my<br=
>
&gt; only reference.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; =E2=80=8BRuben de Vries<br>
&gt; =E2=80=8BCTO, BlockTrail<br>
&gt; ----------------------------------------------------------------------=
--------<br>
&gt; New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.<=
br>
&gt; GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashbu=
rn.<br>
&gt; Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.<b=
r>
&gt; Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely complian=
t.<br>
&gt; <a href=3D"http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet" target=3D"_blank">http://p.sf.=
net/sfu/gigenet</a><br>
&gt; _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development ma=
iling list <a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bit=
coin-development@lists.sourceforge.net</a> <a href=3D"https://lists.sourcef=
orge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development" target=3D"_blank">https://list=
s.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development</a><br>
<br>
--<br>
Miron / devrandom<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---<br>
New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.<br>
GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn.<b=
r>
Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.<br>
Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant.<br=
>
<a href=3D"http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet" target=3D"_blank">http://p.sf.net/s=
fu/gigenet</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bitcoin-development mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-develo=
pment@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development=
" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de=
velopment</a><br>
</blockquote></div>

--089e0115f5a46a16c8050ca0843f--