From gsanders87 at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 15:31:50 2015 From: gsanders87 at gmail.com (Greg Sanders) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 10:31:50 -0500 Subject: [Lightning-dev] Lightning, the death of BIP62, and Segregated Witness In-Reply-To: References: <87si42n1ir.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <1447920788.2353.12.camel@ultimatestunts.nl> Message-ID: The hardfork variant is quite simple, if I understood it correctly. You just stick the signatures in another parallel merkle tree. So if you don't want to validate signatures, just don't download them, and validate everything else. TXIDs don't use the signature at all. Nothing to malleate, AFAIK. Not sure what the softfork plan is, but it will be a talk at Scaling Bitcoin HK. On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Glenn Tarbox, PhD wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 4:33 AM, sickpig at gmail.com > wrote: > >> Hi Pierre >> >> you could start here >> >> >> https://github.com/ElementsProject/elementsproject.github.io#segregated-witness >> >> https://people.xiph.org/~greg/blockstream.gmaxwell.elements.talk.060815.pdf >> https://github.com/ElementsProject/elements > > > There was a brief blip on Reddit: > > > https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ngtx5/could_the_segregated_witness_part_of_the/cwnthlh > > Its weird how little information there is on Segregated Witness. I'm > guessing its a simple concept and those working on it (sipa / gmaxwell) > haven't felt the need to write it up. > > That it "apparently" can be done with a soft fork similar to P2SH is good > news... I guess... > > > -- > Glenn H. Tarbox, PhD > =]|[= > > _______________________________________________ > Lightning-dev mailing list > Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: