MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <mailman.437.1564598007.27056.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.437.1564598007.27056.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: Stepan Snigirev <snigirev.stepan@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:50:47 -0400
Message-ID: <CACL8y1tOn_U2YjpzGuRebv=2=tvaEYwR2yMCK_4girJ4WtZ1Ug@mail.gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000e8a5a058f0e886e"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed Extensions to BIP 174 for Future
	Extensibility
Precedence: list

--0000000000000e8a5a058f0e886e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

> why not use Bitcoin compact uint, which most PSBT consumers already
implement?

I totally agree with that, compact int parsing is already implemented in
all bitcoin applications, wallets and libraries. Also, for certain (mb
proprietary) applications I will be willing to use multi-byte keys where
the first byte defines the application type and next bytes define
application-specific fields.

I would suggest to set proprietary bytes to 0xF0-0xFC or to 0xE0-0xEF then
(E for Enterprise?).

--0000000000000e8a5a058f0e886e
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>&gt; why not use Bitcoin compact uint, which most PSB=
T consumers already</div>implement?<div><br></div><div>I totally agree with=
 that, compact int parsing is already implemented in all bitcoin applicatio=
ns, wallets and libraries. Also, for certain (mb proprietary) applications =
I will be willing to use multi-byte keys where the first byte defines the a=
pplication type and next bytes define application-specific fields.</div><di=
v><br></div><div>I would suggest to set proprietary bytes to 0xF0-0xFC or t=
o 0xE0-0xEF then (E for Enterprise?).</div></div>

--0000000000000e8a5a058f0e886e--