From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WXWGY-0005Kq-GN for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 13:40:42 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from mail-vc0-f176.google.com ([209.85.220.176]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WXWGX-0005Tr-76 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 13:40:42 +0000 Received: by mail-vc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id lc6so759345vcb.35 for ; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 06:40:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=KYN4l0kkrID34B49CrSf1rH7RCRLlY0sc9+d5DGRiks=; b=AtlTwWagmrmsGOf/PfxOsmX07/7i5hPfY2s8m8Ht2NKaSCR9oIGA38C9v6PtZkknn/ /lQfaRPgp6S53tWk9ql247pVWrkaVZHhoeRAfoX+GYlnEFdL/93q78eeUCKIEViJrYhU anNRnGj6cpO/5bOk8uh4fKUwVc6Zg7kNrdtGeKNNehvPHWgGqJ2fk8wtBbFKXjjpKHs2 E8cIWmcc5ZMh/GvZB9NW677PQgWfbqdbRR0BpuZiO0jugeAaOmFxnPUkawfoBK3b996K zUpVF31Fw+CMBxWTV6oQwaWEU9poxHyISAjf3CoI1XFbTX0TtFqVttpAnobQ7QnbenQq Oiiw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnS6Vlmy7dEqreB6LpIcandd3T5XONotBkMKoZ61w2thlr88qqNGCQi4bSHu5MDYELOU3kM X-Received: by 10.58.90.99 with SMTP id bv3mr150831veb.34.1396964435698; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 06:40:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: marek@palatinus.cz Received: by 10.58.234.100 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 06:40:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53344FF8.7030204@gk2.sk> From: slush Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 15:40:05 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: GpU_ylvDhww2FBSyUbFrpYXvAuc Message-ID: To: Pieter Wuille Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01182b8ef43a0904f68820a6 X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (slush[at]centrum.cz) 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Headers-End: 1WXWGX-0005Tr-76 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] New BIP32 structure X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 13:40:42 -0000 --089e01182b8ef43a0904f68820a6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote: > I still don't understand the purpose of cointype. If you don't want to > risk reusing the same keys across different currencies, just don't use > the same seed or the same account? That is purely a client-side issue. > > Of course it is purely client-side issue, but it matters. There's actually no reason to generate, backup and store individual seeds for various coins and purposes. User can handle all his identities and altcoins with single seed, avoiding potential issues with using wrong seed for other purposes. Actually with accounts and cointypes in the path, you can have all your crypto funds stored on single seed, which I see as very comfortable solution. But to gain advantages of such solution and avoid reusing the same path across blockchains, we need to separate the space, which is achieved by cointype. > If the consensus is to add the cointype anyway, can we fix it to be > equal to the 4-byte magic in the serialization (after setting the high > bit to true)? That way there aren't two 4-byte magic codes that need > to be defined for each, and at the same time make it obvious from the > serialized form what it is for. > > Serialization magic of bip32 seed is in my opinion completely unnecessary. Most of software does not care about it anyway; You can use xprv/xpub pair for main net, testnet, litecoin, dogecoin, whatevercoin. Instead using the same seed (xprv) and then separate the chains *inside* the bip32 path seems more useful to me. Marek --089e01182b8ef43a0904f68820a6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.c= om> wrote:
I still don't understand the purpose of = cointype. If you don't want to
risk reusing the same keys across different currencies, just don't use<= br> the same seed or the same account? That is purely a client-side issue.


Of course it is purely client-side iss= ue, but it matters.

There's actually no reason= to generate, backup and store individual seeds for various coins and purpo= ses. User can handle all his identities and altcoins with single seed, avoi= ding potential issues with using wrong seed for other purposes.

Actually with accounts and cointypes in the path, you c= an have all your crypto funds stored on single seed, which I see as very co= mfortable solution.

But to gain advantages of such= solution and avoid reusing the same path across blockchains, we need to se= parate the space, which is achieved by cointype.
=A0
If the consensus is to add the cointype anyway, can we fix it to be
equal to the 4-byte magic in the serialization (after setting the high
bit to true)? That way there aren't two 4-byte magic codes that need to be defined for each, and at the same time make it obvious from the
serialized form what it is for.


Ser= ialization magic of bip32 seed is in my opinion completely unnecessary. Mos= t of software does not care about it anyway; You can use xprv/xpub pair for= main net, testnet, litecoin, dogecoin, whatevercoin.

Instead using the same seed (xprv) and then separate th= e chains *inside* the bip32 path seems more useful to me.

Marek=A0
--089e01182b8ef43a0904f68820a6--