Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP draft: BIP32 Path Templates

2020-07-06 Thread Dmitry Petukhov via bitcoin-dev
В Fri, 3 Jul 2020 21:53:44 +0500
Dmitry Petukhov via bitcoin-dev 
wrote:

> My hope is that having a clear specification and (possibly, in the
> future) permissibly licensed quality implementations would make
> adopting such format easier for vendors.

I have added a C implementation (MIT-licensed):
https://github.com/dgpv/bip32_template_c_implementation


pgpfozKsIww_E.pgp
Description: Цифровая подпись OpenPGP
___
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


Re: [bitcoin-dev] MAD-HTLC

2020-07-06 Thread Tejaswi Nadahalli via bitcoin-dev
On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 1:49 PM Itay Tsabary 
wrote:

> Note the required token amount for the collateral contract is low and
> independent of the required deposit tokens -- only a relatively small
> incentive is required to make "acting honestly" Bob's preferred choice.
> So, this is basically a negligible overhead, token-wise. As a downside, it
> does create slightly larger transactions (another UTXO, etc.).
>

I read the MAD-HTLC paper and I think it actually doesn't get into the size
of the collateral (v^{col}). I might have missed it though. Can you please
point me to the section in the paper where the amount is discussed?

I assumed that v^{col} has to be at least the size of v^{dep}. Otherwise,
Bob can threaten Alice with an HTLC bribery attack, and Alice knows that
Bob has very little to lose. Bob *should* have the same amount to lose, to
make it work - no?

>
___
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev