On Tue, Nov 12, 2019, 21:33 ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Good morning all,
>
> It seems to me that adding the length for checksumming purposes need not
> require the length to be *actually* added in the address format.
>
Indeed!
This has the followin
Good morning all,
It seems to me that adding the length for checksumming purposes need not
require the length to be *actually* added in the address format.
So, currently, below is my understanding of bech32 validation:
* Run BCH checksum on witness program.
* Compare checksum to checksum in add
I agree on all points. The address space already brings enough confusion to
users out there. As it stands, we can use script version and program length
for address validity. Sneaking an alternate checksum into the mix for
different length programs lets us lean on our parsing libraries and not
incre
A proposal for a new blockchain-agnostic payment protocol:
https://cypherpunk.org/2019/11/10/towards-a-singular-payment-protocol/
Includes the following characteristics:
- can be used with crypto or fiat currencies
- multiple currency options for a single transaction
- multiple payments in a sin
