From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96DD4C013A for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 05:00:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C5D487088 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 05:00:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pYf0L++t3URh for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 05:00:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [203.11.71.1]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1699D870A9 for ; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 05:00:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ozlabs.org (Postfix, from userid 1011) id 4DCSTW12VNz9sW8; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 16:00:31 +1100 (AEDT) From: Rusty Russell To: Pieter Wuille , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , Bitcoin dev list In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2021 15:30:24 +1030 Message-ID: <87lfd27lhz.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bech32m BIP: new checksum, and usage for segwit address X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2021 05:00:37 -0000 Perhaps title 'Bech32m address format for native v0-16 segregated witness outputs' should probably be v1-16? This is a thorough and clear write up; a superb read. Side note: I am deeply impressed with your mathematical jujitsu that no bech32 string is also a valid bech32m string *even with three errors*. This sways me even more that this approach is correct. Untested-Ack. Thanks, Rusty. Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev writes: > On Monday, January 4, 2021 4:14 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> here is a BIP draft for changing the checksum in native segwit addresses for v1 and higher, following the discussion in https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2020-December/018293.html >> >> Overall, the idea is: >> * Define a new encoding which is a tweaked variant of Bech32, called Bech32m. It refers to the Bech32 section of BIP173, which remains in effect. >> * Define a new segwit address encoding which replaces the corresponding section in BIP173. It prescribes using Bech32 for v0 witness addresses, and Bech32m for other versions. > > Of course I forgot the actual link: https://github.com/sipa/bips/blob/bip-bech32m/bip-bech32m.mediawiki > > Cheers, > > -- > Pieter > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev