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 97A7326C for ; Fri, 13 May 2016 16:59:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-yw0-f182.google.com (mail-yw0-f182.google.com [209.85.161.182]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DC3E178 for ; Fri, 13 May 2016 16:59:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-f182.google.com with SMTP id g133so108341226ywb.2 for ; Fri, 13 May 2016 09:59:36 -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=ZMGWvzzJnCFqNkoZ4CIeq5ubUUTtJBb/licLL8whvss=; b=V+IPaC/rSK+6H4UfPi6JRnxcTmPlB4luRIKsmje7V3Kizb3Ls6GHzKLiXBR53Kads3 ITrrtO93ayKgIpKpmixXfyIxsMB6TRtJFaJAZhhHKFpNvCc9tOTzAGbQHwx312ZuLzph o9Llrwj/xaQzwWw7l2QmNBLr46pQt3zQ4ZeggjwRhLfP/YH/k8JG5AcAs47Y8WLjeqSz ldXd9JWmCp7MnW4jzApOH87n2Kw7qVoEGM63i27ES0QVHa0ZWG+VCVZUd01b3Eda2Cg2 /Fg+vMcEXTWzmS9rTcyfQJ7YKY3uUB379+JHmX+Wr7i8cdOGu3JrXcTg9KE4osmZe3Mv AP8Q== 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=ZMGWvzzJnCFqNkoZ4CIeq5ubUUTtJBb/licLL8whvss=; b=XD2gweq9+WHEM5oQ0VwTZeNBliUZDAMGc3DOokmb1vO+r3l3LrLBxg5fWsbFcsP6MF a7k7vPxhU8F0FNaF2xXi0hbKVrtVNzqf06c70yoFSBYbgA4cei/R1Lk0eERHm9u38L/n oyxGi+CUH7/aDYNu6nMWgagIOwVd9NPaoqnAoaEv7eCmV1kepb6C9Y5mnd2JiU72t7P1 /528AhXJ4ykdYgtf9sHHVabm8MM93GG6pEtfJkOdC5n89rXL/Kpkb82omCyKSJNL48k+ cZLe3LVq7GvXZIzBEY/fAZTYExoeS48e7TtyCQTebI5v8qPTd0Rnx/RNRov9n8fuA3Di 8RnQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWHDybdbx+zcyxmYaSJvUnux7CdW3NqJZX1Hjk1QP1K23jIuq0XCaBULJvhRWCNhOQ1amEHkE9TbY3B1g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.129.154.77 with SMTP id r74mr8846344ywg.91.1463158775436; Fri, 13 May 2016 09:59:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.13.233.2 with HTTP; Fri, 13 May 2016 09:59:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5735FC99.5090001@satoshilabs.com> References: <5735D3A4.7090608@mycelium.com> <5735EC17.5040901@satoshilabs.com> <5735FC99.5090001@satoshilabs.com> Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 09:59:35 -0700 Message-ID: From: Aaron Voisine To: Pavol Rusnak Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0b8ce40f5f390532bc33f8 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 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 13 May 2016 17:00:18 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion 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: Fri, 13 May 2016 16:59:36 -0000 --94eb2c0b8ce40f5f390532bc33f8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 This scheme is independent of the number of accounts. It works with BIP44 as well as BIP43 purpose 0, or any other BIP43 purpose/layout. Instead of overloading the account index to indicate the type of address, you use the chain index, which is already being used to indicate what the specific address chain is to be used for, i.e. receive vs change addresses. Aaron Voisine co-founder and CEO breadwallet On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Pavol Rusnak wrote: > On 13/05/16 18:03, Aaron Voisine wrote: > > I like the idea of specifying the type of address as a bit field flag. > > 0x80000000 is already used to specify hardened derivation, so 0x40000000 > > would be the next available to specify witness addresses. This is > > compatible with existing accounts and wallet layouts. > > I think this is over-optimization. What is the advantage of > > m/0'/0x40000000 instead of m/whatever'/0 ? > > But this is off-topic anyway, as we are discussing multiple-accounts per > wallet layout here, not one-account-per-wallet design. > > -- > Best Regards / S pozdravom, > > Pavol "stick" Rusnak > SatoshiLabs.com > --94eb2c0b8ce40f5f390532bc33f8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This scheme is independent of the number of accounts. It w= orks with BIP44 as well as BIP43 purpose 0, or any other BIP43 purpose/layo= ut. Instead of overloading the account index to indicate the type of addres= s, you use the chain index, which is already being used to indicate what th= e specific address chain is to be used for, i.e. receive vs change addresse= s.

=

Aaron Voisine
co-founder and CEO
breadwallet

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Pavol Rusna= k <stick@satoshilabs.com> wrote:
On 13/05/16 18:03, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> I like the idea of specifying the type of address as a bit field flag.=
> 0x80000000 is already used to specify hardened derivation, so 0x400000= 00
> would be the next available to specify witness addresses. This is
> compatible with existing accounts and wallet layouts.

I think this is over-optimization. What is the advantage of

m/0'/0x40000000 instead of m/whatever'/0 ?

But this is off-topic anyway, as we are discussing multiple-accounts per wallet layout here, not one-account-per-wallet design.

--
Best Regards / S pozdravom,

Pavol "stick" Rusnak
SatoshiLabs.com

--94eb2c0b8ce40f5f390532bc33f8--