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
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
|
Return-Path: <hoenicke@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27ED826C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 14 May 2016 12:15:21 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95F0A18A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 14 May 2016 12:15:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id a17so67748176wme.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 14 May 2016 05:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version
:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=xSyZwolY/RY28ZrCnjO6l4b9oKMCZSl9COxOnvLRDU8=;
b=wrRUN24hoyueN8JavBTxEUIMUvDYDgXLpBo1g+Qi3X8DegM/X5PM2o7FKUlRwC28lE
pTyiQXR7gXw4vQssg7LITX/EwGIu/gpGW5QHaoDVqG7JQJ+5sB6rYKz/fJHsBrktnIoi
t7csONAqOSgfj9/LLEjWKpGlH7ATbLDeGvSTmaSZ3/WQCZxvQCM52kQn4tSmm/eLduMB
8bRUyevBzwYP3j9OrL0x4YPDHDryisYcWSC6shDBqGJ9+U4dQMdkVBSEsDLVTTme0R9a
+nsGz6xBiVyo7kan2xqli2m81b/j5DEW+M06rwIh3KGkbLFWgCuUB/877+707EE2dP4T
RpBg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=xSyZwolY/RY28ZrCnjO6l4b9oKMCZSl9COxOnvLRDU8=;
b=b+VF/WNixtGiANcNS4tgSqmTfbnnnYuEmZ0LHuWIEtZZtmiRaqewTlz3bw2Mm7zS1j
xn/q/Ozl9uY2guu2NO4cwfVwb4MvlbhNsl04Blj8kkO35vJQYNrt9QWPK6tYJJTJYwDw
G2NG+PCgEuN+vN7JoPc9inlTHgY0hNmyQymWSc9lU+y2TsAdo9PDaSNJ7jDiQ41RcRjA
Gu7j3fZJI6KTYSilfPQJtycQbb7ovR/4d8SOgPllbfSgsW+8QNEKkYolISBGUgMe/22Q
Y/dTTfCdi6+37MPcZczsiCErQMrGKKg8rnS4pHkRkbZHcUll995nF/g8FfMOfqpC3p18
1Rlg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FW7jTuQ6Wo3+1Wt4iU019RVTP13H/5nYXIiSplm5dSE6AaJFwS3Hs+JJ9dBZ5QmRA==
X-Received: by 10.28.213.1 with SMTP id m1mr8586881wmg.103.1463228119245;
Sat, 14 May 2016 05:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:4dd0:ff00:8a0a:c68e:8fff:fef3:22ad?
([2001:4dd0:ff00:8a0a:c68e:8fff:fef3:22ad])
by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id
8sm8115060wms.14.2016.05.14.05.15.17
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Sat, 14 May 2016 05:15:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: Daniel Weigl <Daniel.Weigl@mycelium.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <5735D3A4.7090608@mycelium.com>
From: Jochen Hoenicke <hoenicke@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <573716D4.3000108@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 14:15:16 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5735D3A4.7090608@mycelium.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bip44 extension for P2SH/P2WSH/...
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 12:15:21 -0000
Am 13.05.2016 um 15:16 schrieb Daniel Weigl via bitcoin-dev:
>
> With SegWit approaching it would make sense to define a common derivation scheme how BIP44 compatible wallets will handle P2(W)SH (and later on P2WPKH) receiving addresses.
> I was thinking about starting a BIP for it, but I wanted to get some feedback from other wallets devs first.
>
The discussion so far shows that starting a new BIP is a very good idea.
Otherwise everyone would do it slightly different.
With P2(W)SH you mean P2WPKH embedded in P2SH, right? P2WSH is
completely different and used for example for multisig.
> In my opinion there are two(?) different options:
To summarize, option 1 means one account that supports both non-segwit
and segwit addresses. With option 2 you have one p2pkh-only account and
one segwit-only account, which are completely separated.
I personally would vote for option 1. Scanning twice the addresses can
be avoided with Aaron's trick. The second disadvantage remains:
> -) If you have the same xPub/xPriv key in different wallets, you need to be sure both take care for the different address types
A non-segwit wallet would ignore all segwit outputs, which means that
the balance it shows is smaller (and it doesn't show transactions that
spend from previous segwit outputs). I don't see that this can lead to
losing money except maybe when sweeping the account with a p2pkh-only
wallet and then throwing the xprv away.
Of course, you can also do option 2 and let it appear to the user as if
it was only one account, but what is the advantage over option 1 in that
case? Also you need two xpubs to watch this joined account.
Jochen
|
