In your proposed field key format,
{0x02}|{signing_pubkey}|{m}|{xpub}|...|{xpub}
I think you can replace the signing pubkey with just a fingerprint of
the master key, that would save 29 bytes per 0x02 field.
If the only entity that is concerned about the validity of the
signature is those that
Hi Eric,
Thank you for your questions as they show what concepts need further
explanation, so you understand the potential of this proposal and how it is
helpful to the ecosystem.
Riskless zero bond is in fact the most basic concept of financial engineering.
Yes, there are engineers of
Hi Tamas,
There are a number of economic assumptions contained herein. While I understand
you would like to focus on implementation, the worst bugs are requirements
bugs. IMO these should be addressed first. I’ve addressed some possible issues
inline.
> On Jun 28, 2019, at 01:27, Tamas
Thanks for the reply Peter. Comments inline:
2019年6月28日(金) 23:37 Peter D. Gray :
> Thanks I get the idea better now: You want the PSBT creator to be
> able to indicate to the signers that it (the PSBT creator) controls
> specific outputs that don't otherwise look like change.
>
> Some problems:
I start with a formalisation of loans as common in finance:
A zero bond is a contract between two parties Alice and Bob whereby Alice
receives an amount less than P and has to pay back P at a later time point
called maturity.
The difference between the amount received and P is the interest
Thanks I get the idea better now: You want the PSBT creator to be
able to indicate to the signers that it (the PSBT creator) controls
specific outputs that don't otherwise look like change.
Some problems:
> extended private key of the current signer derived from the
> signer's root to
Hmm? If I'm following what you mean, that's not the P2P rules, it's the
> Unserialize code, in particular:
>
> compat/assumptions.h:52:static_assert(sizeof(int) == 4, "32-bit int
> assumed");
>
> serialize.h:289:uint64_t ReadCompactSize(Stream& is)
>
> serialize.h-679-template typename V>
>
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 08:08:01PM -0400, Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> I have a comment about the 'input_index' of the transaction digest for taproot
> signatures. It is currently listed as 2 bytes. I think it would be better to
> expand that to 4 bytes.
FWIW, I think this would
