[Bitcoin-development] BIP for standard multi-signature P2SH addresses

[Bitcoin-development] BIP for standard multi-signature P2SH addresses

[Thomas Kerin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1488 bytes --]


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hi all,

I just created a PR on bitcoin/bips for a proposed standard for creating
standard multisignature P2SH addresses given m, and a set of public keys.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/146

I used BIP0090 as a place-holder, but I would like to request a BIP
number for this now.

All the best,

- -- 
Thomas Kerin
- -------------------------

My PGP key can be found here
<http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3F0D2F83A2966155>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=QU8i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2186 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for standard multi-signature P2SH addresses

[Mike Hearn]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 36 bytes --]

bitcoinj also uses this convention.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 92 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for standard multi-signature P2SH addresses

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Thomas Kerin <me@thomaskerin.io> wrote:
> I used BIP0090 as a place-holder, but I would like to request a BIP number
> for this now.

We have had repeated problems in the past with people working on and
circulating prior draft proposals squatting on each others numbers,
and each demanding access to the same numbers. As a matter of
procedure I will not assign squatted numbers, but also discussion
should come in advance of number assignment; general subject here
seems reasonable but many proposals are withdrawn by the party
tendering them after further discussion shows the effort to be without
public interest or actually subsumed by other functionality. :)

Proposals should not be called "BIP[nn]" until they're actually a BIP.
  Feel free to call it bip-kerin-multisignature or any other
placeholder name that won't be confused with a finished BIP for
drafting.

If there is any public documentation on the process which caused you
specific confusion, please feel free to point me at it and I'll be
sure to fix it! Sorry for any confusion there.

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for standard multi-signature P2SH addresses

[devrandom]

ACK.  CryptoCorp uses this method for our external signer service.

On 2015-03-11 04:45 AM, Thomas Kerin wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I just created a PR on bitcoin/bips for a proposed standard for creating
> standard multisignature P2SH addresses given m, and a set of public keys.
> 
> https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/146
> 
> I used BIP0090 as a place-holder, but I would like to request a BIP
> number for this now.
> 
> All the best,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> 

-- 
devrandom / Miron

-- 
devrandom / Miron

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for standard multi-signature P2SH addresses

[Pindar Wong]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2233 bytes --]

Hi,

Perhaps at some point consider introducing something akin to a
'Bitcoin-Draft' (BD) status with some autoexpiry period?

I understand that the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
<http://www.ietf.org>  has the concept of 'Internet Drafts" (ID)
<http://www.ietf.org/ietf-ftp/1id-guidelines.txt> and this looks like it
has worked for them so far.

m2c.

p.


On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 4:16 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Thomas Kerin <me@thomaskerin.io> wrote:
> > I used BIP0090 as a place-holder, but I would like to request a BIP
> number
> > for this now.
>
> We have had repeated problems in the past with people working on and
> circulating prior draft proposals squatting on each others numbers,
> and each demanding access to the same numbers. As a matter of
> procedure I will not assign squatted numbers, but also discussion
> should come in advance of number assignment; general subject here
> seems reasonable but many proposals are withdrawn by the party
> tendering them after further discussion shows the effort to be without
> public interest or actually subsumed by other functionality. :)
>
> Proposals should not be called "BIP[nn]" until they're actually a BIP.
>   Feel free to call it bip-kerin-multisignature or any other
> placeholder name that won't be confused with a finished BIP for
> drafting.
>
> If there is any public documentation on the process which caused you
> specific confusion, please feel free to point me at it and I'll be
> sure to fix it! Sorry for any confusion there.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website,
> sponsored
> by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for
> all
> things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs
> to
> news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3051 bytes --]

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for standard multi-signature P2SH addresses

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Pindar Wong <pindar.wong@gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps at some point consider introducing something akin to a
> 'Bitcoin-Draft' (BD) status with some autoexpiry period?
>
> I understand that the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)  has the
> concept of 'Internet Drafts" (ID) and this looks like it has worked for them
> so far.

Thats more or less what posting to the list is supposed to be.
Creating a draft document requires no approval, beyond filling out the
right form.

Perhaps calling out that as a distinct step would be better, indeed.

Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for standard multi-signature P2SH addresses

[Pindar Wong]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 897 bytes --]

Understood... perhaps just add something like:

'After copy-editing and acceptance,* a BIP number is assigned* and it will
be published here.'?

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_Improvement_Proposals

p.


On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 7:34 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Pindar Wong <pindar.wong@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Perhaps at some point consider introducing something akin to a
> > 'Bitcoin-Draft' (BD) status with some autoexpiry period?
> >
> > I understand that the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)  has the
> > concept of 'Internet Drafts" (ID) and this looks like it has worked for
> them
> > so far.
>
> Thats more or less what posting to the list is supposed to be.
> Creating a draft document requires no approval, beyond filling out the
> right form.
>
> Perhaps calling out that as a distinct step would be better, indeed.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1470 bytes --]