On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandre...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> I've been asked a couple of times: why doesn't signrawtx handle the
> BIP 0010 (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0010) transaction format?
>
> I considered parsing/writing BIP 10 format for raw transactions, but
> decided that reading/writing BIP 10 format should happen at a higher
> level and not in the low-level RPC calls. So 'raw transactions' are
> simply hex-encoded into JSON strings, and encoding/decoding them is
> just a couple of lines of already-written-and-debugged code.
>
>
BIP 10 <https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0010> could use some improvement. I
created it for offline and multi-sig tx but there was no reception to it
because no one was using offline or multi-sig tx at the time except for
Armory (which only currently implements offline tx). So I made something
that fit my needs, and it has served its purpose well for me. But I also
think it could be expanded and improved before there is wider adoption of
it. It's a little clunky and not very rigorous.
Elements of it that I'd really like to keep:
(1) Some aspects of human-readability -- even if regular users will never
look at it, it should be possible for advanced users to manually copy&paste
the data around and see what's going on in the transaction and what
signatures are present. I'm thinking of super-high-security situations
where manual handling of such data may even be the norm.
(2) Should be compact -- I took the concept of ASCII-armoring from PGP/GPG,
because, for the reason above, it's much easier and cleaner to view/select
when copied inline. If a random user accidentally runs across it, it will
partially self-identify itself
(3) Includes all previous transactions so the device can verify transaction
inputs without the blockchain.
Things that could be added:
-- It needs a BIP16 script entry (this was created for vanilla multi-sig
before BIP 16 was created)
-- Comment lines
-- Version number
-- Use base58/64 encoding
-- Rigorous formatting spec
-- Binary representation
-- A better name than "Tx Distribution Proposal"
I'll be releasing the Beta version of Armory soon, and after that, I'll
probably be thinking about a multi-signature support interface. That would
be a good time for me to tie in a better version of BIP 10 -- one that is
compatible with other clients implementing the same thing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
