From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CFE37D for ; Sat, 14 May 2016 17:09:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-yw0-f172.google.com (mail-yw0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1D9317F for ; Sat, 14 May 2016 17:09:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-f172.google.com with SMTP id j74so128715607ywg.1 for ; Sat, 14 May 2016 10:09:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=23OXqpivPm4WULXhrVnXa0PGp4+Dx+llW2KtaIAs5vE=; b=GymD3fCfECXepT/W3yV2w/Lsm3Zc78RxqxsrGDKCyIsCJHr5Hpi5w6NNRKBJ/3F7nM xZY8MT1cA52o8c5M/dixGQNt9+Au9K5egoDTbUAQWwwbVJ9Z7xTj/WjdyNbbhQ0DluZ8 iria9KoJ3rJf8ZLyE6Nhznmear3LErVGYdhNn+tk+2ZqTOaCCcgkOf7AuB+noL8up7cW G+DWYIUleGlc+rKFzFq40c0Fm+4h5hvg37Y5tpc6SrlSVgVL/1Qfbxf+jJ/Zz0A137Bd k2AKdaJIiHaycTcgiPCvMWMML93if266RsuqNWzi+eNPgfBgiwSaT9ove9GXpKDuUMqL 2ijQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=23OXqpivPm4WULXhrVnXa0PGp4+Dx+llW2KtaIAs5vE=; b=iXZVwagRq7iCoz9KpLTfc30zZpS0q6F0IvuOm7ptasQegdrtn3GTrlWoaTzVfDnH2A yVZPPzWTqbuq2jH6ZvFrKqoMf+2Qh2LiAsHi+eD/ttFh3TuPWOH6rbY5DMO+PRJi5byr 2j/Qg9C/R7kj/jr+eafgyoThSo5/s1LR9ZtiKEXRHSOVKzxKClgc1wAt8rmiAW+X/q5x ZxrwnTI9UC1LKPK5gBUYHu4tFhgUpW6+snyonbHoelomdRiLRspc1RnWHtpO4/cchB7Z F9nptNQJ5CNAvco3klYymj6MCRel3bErHkqksMq0JewfuDLgFRCptWr1sLkvf//Bq+u4 85dA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVNIhJXmoSX7BwYVcKZMOGwaeMKqE12UpIP+LsDfz+nstPgBrRWgi2ueMbzn6X7VYgHJj/cB2/ajnnUgQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.37.14.138 with SMTP id 132mr8376589ybo.20.1463245782799; Sat, 14 May 2016 10:09:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.13.233.2 with HTTP; Sat, 14 May 2016 10:09:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <57373157.9090408@satoshilabs.com> References: <5735D3A4.7090608@mycelium.com> <57373157.9090408@satoshilabs.com> Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 10:09:42 -0700 Message-ID: From: Aaron Voisine To: Pavol Rusnak , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113cc9781a616a0532d0750c X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Andreas Schildbach 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 17:09:44 -0000 --001a113cc9781a616a0532d0750c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 7:08 AM, Pavol Rusnak via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On 14/05/16 09:00, Andreas Schildbach via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > The whole idea of BIP43 (which BIP44 bases on) is that how these BIPs > > define balance retrieval never changes. This is to make sure you always > > see the same balance on "same BIP" wallets (and same seed of course). > > This! Thanks Andreas for formulating my thought that I was not able to > articulate earlier. > Indeed, this would still be the case when using a new BIPXX to define adding segwit chains to what were previously BIP43/44 wallets. In this case retrieval of a BIP44 wallet remains exactly the same as it did before. A BIP44 wallet can still be recovered with any BIP44 compatible wallet software. After you upgrade an existing BIP44 wallet to a BIPXX wallet, now it is no longer a BIP44 wallet. It is now a BIPXX wallet, and can only be recovered using BIPXX compatible wallet software. If you are concerned about making a new BIP that fits in the BIP43 framework, i.e. a new purpose number, there's no reason this can't also be done. You could create a new purpose number YY. Wallets that follow BIPYY look just like BIPXX, except that they may only contain segwit address chains, no standard P2PKH address chains. On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > AFAIK: Bip39 import (cross-wallet) is not supported by Schildbachs > android wallet [1] and Electrum [2] and Breadwallet [3]. Breadwallet is BIP39, with the BIP43 purpose 0 derivation path, and I believe Schlindbachs is as well. Electrum has their own format. I don't know if it also supports sweeping other mnemonics and wallet layouts. Aaron Voisine co-founder and CEO breadwallet --001a113cc9781a616a0532d0750c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 7:08 AM, Pavol Rusnak via bitcoin-= dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On 14/05/16 09:00, Andreas Schildbach via bitcoi= n-dev wrote:
> The whole idea of BIP43 (which BIP44 bases on) is that how these BIPs<= br> > define balance retrieval never changes. This is to make sure you alway= s
> see the same balance on "same BIP" wallets (and same seed of= course).

This! Thanks Andreas for formulating my thought that I was not able = to
articulate earlier.

Indeed, this would = still be the case when using a new BIPXX to define adding segwit chains to = what were previously BIP43/44 wallets. In this case retrieval of a BIP44 wa= llet remains exactly the same as it did before. A BIP44 wallet can still be= recovered with any BIP44 compatible wallet software. After you upgrade an = existing BIP44 wallet to a BIPXX wallet, now it is no longer a BIP44 wallet= . It is now a BIPXX wallet, and can only be recovered using BIPXX compatibl= e wallet software.

If you are concerned about maki= ng a new BIP that fits in the BIP43 framework, i.e. a new purpose number, t= here's no reason this can't also be done. You could create a new pu= rpose number YY. Wallets that follow BIPYY look just like BIPXX, except tha= t they may only contain segwit address chains, no standard P2PKH address ch= ains.

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Jonas Schne= lli via bitcoin-dev=C2=A0<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfound= ation.org>=C2=A0wrote:
AFAIK: Bip39 impor= t (cross-wallet) is not supported by Schildbachs
android wallet [1] and = Electrum [2] and Breadwallet [3].

Breadwall= et is BIP39, with the BIP43 purpose 0 derivation path, and I believe Schlin= dbachs is as well. Electrum has their own format. I don't know if it al= so supports sweeping other mnemonics and wallet layouts.
Aaron Voisine
co-founder and CEO
breadwallet
--001a113cc9781a616a0532d0750c--