Gavin,
You have pretty much nailed my intent in both respects. This sets up a way
to negotiate the address and abstract away the nasty details of finding
public keys from bitcoin addresses, and provides a nice clean way for
redemption abstracting away the long strings of hex.
For redemption, I
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote:
I very much like the idea of assuming each party uses HD wallets, that
certainly simplifies things greatly.
It also assumes a reality different from our current one.
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote:
I very much like the idea of assuming each party uses HD wallets, that
certainly simplifies things greatly.
It also assumes a reality different from our
Sure, but I don't see wallets being able to _assume_ _remote_ parties
have an HD wallet for a long, long time. Interoperability common
sense implies the environment will be heterogenous, perhaps forever,
invalidating assume-each-party-uses-HD logic.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Gavin
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote:
Sure, but I don't see wallets being able to _assume_ _remote_ parties
have an HD wallet for a long, long time. Interoperability common
sense implies the environment will be heterogenous, perhaps forever,
invalidating
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Gavin Andresen
gavinandre...@gmail.com wrote:
If the remote party is one of the parties involved in a multisig, and speaks
the Lets set up a multisig wallet together / Lets spend from a multisig
protocols, then it should be perfectly reasonable to assume that
(#include rant.h)
Right now, HD is hot air. Let us end the pie-in-the-sky assumptions
about how HD will save the day, with zero code to back it up. Bitcoin
Wallet purportedly fails to rotate addresses, a privacy ugly, because
of this Waiting For Godot situation. An attempt to add a simple,
Speaking from the MultiBit perspective, all future protocol development
(with the exception of critical security and network compatibility fixes)
will be put into a HD wallet. Over time we want to see MultiBit Classic
gracefully retire and be fully superseded.
Right now, HD is not out there but
You can follow HDW progress in bitcoinj on this branch:
https://github.com/bitcoinj/bitcoinj/commits/keychain
I've been working on it for a couple of months now. Electrum (Thomas V) is
also making good progress, and Trezor already uses HD wallets. I think most
popular end user wallets except
Trezor and Electrum may be earlier than this.
Sorry for not joining the discussion earlier.
I have postponed the release of bip32 features in Electrum due to
ongoing discussions with Trezor and bitcoinj developers.
I planned to post a summary in a separate thread, but this info is also
On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 16:18 +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
You can follow HDW progress in bitcoinj on this branch:
https://github.com/bitcoinj/bitcoinj/commits/keychain
I've been working on it for a couple of months now. Electrum (Thomas
V) is also making good progress, and Trezor
Hello,
I wanted to just add a very brief note to this discussion, that presently
for multisignature creation and management (new transaction etc) I've been
using this: https://coinb.in/multisig/
There were some initial bumps in the road but they were worked out,
see full thread more or less
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:13:48AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Sure, but I don't see wallets being able to _assume_ _remote_ parties
have an HD wallet for a long, long time. Interoperability common
sense implies the environment will be heterogenous, perhaps forever,
invalidating
Hello people,
We are working on some of this stuff. We had some very early draft on
how we envisioned multisig happening. It is all implemented in Haskoin
available as multiple repositories in Github. I am happy to see this
gathering momentum.
Our multisig system uses BIP-0032 HD wallets, and
I might as well throw in a word about Armory. After our next release in
a couple weeks, we will be going full-speed at new wallets and BIP32
integration. Just like Jean-Pierre mentioned, we'll be using parallel
trees to generate P2SH addresses after sorting the keys
lexicographically. We plan
Ciphrex CoinVault (https://ciphrex.com) is currently using parallel trees with
lexicographic sorting of keys.
CoinVault is also using a partially signed transaction format whereby 0-length
placeholders are used for missing signatures in the transaction scripts. Once
all the required signatures
16 matches
Mail list logo
