Re: [Bitcoin-development] Request For Discussion / BIP number - Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets
William, I've amended the proposal's Motivation section slightly for clarification. I'm not sure how a cosigner_index branch would benefit this proposal. Granted, I don't fully understand the benefits of the cosigner_index branch in BIP-0045. From what I understand, the wallet branch of my proposal seems to accomplish a similar goal. Jona, Your explanation is correct. As for this being appropriate as a BIP, I agree that it's an arguable point to say it improves Bitcoin. However, this proposal exists because of BIP-0044, which also describes a multi-currency hierarchy. For that reason, I think this is an appropriate proposal. Thank you both for your feedback. On 04/08/2015 12:41 PM, William Swanson wrote: Oops, sorry I missed that. Since that's the reason this proposal exists, I would consider putting it right up top where people can see it. Also, since this proposal is specifically designed for multi-sig, I would look at what BIP45 is doing and maybe incorporate a cosigner_index branch. Otherwise, this idea seems like a reasonable way to organize a wallet. -William On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 9:28 AM, 木ノ下じょな kinoshitaj...@gmail.com wrote: William, I believe the reasoning for this is stated in the Coin Type section. Public derivation is used so that cosigners need only know one of each other's public keys, rather than needing to distribute public keys for each coin. BIP44 has a coin level, but it's a private derived level, so cosigners would not be able to generate multiple crypto currencies of each others' without giving each other n xpubs where n is the number of currencies shared. This new proposal basically sticks coin type on the public derivation side of things so that I could generate litecoin or darkcoin multisigs without your permission... Kefkius, This BIP seems like a good fit for multi-currency wallets based on multisig. So kudos for putting it in writing. However, I don't know if this is really a BIP thing. It's not improving Bitcoin (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal... remember?), in fact, by definition it is improving altcoin usability. For that reason alone I will say I disagree for a BIP for this. - Jona 2015-04-08 16:46 GMT+09:00 William Swanson swanson...@gmail.com: It's not really clear why this is better than BIP 44 as it already stands. You have the same fields, but they are just in a different order. Couldn't you just use the existing BIP 44 hierarchy, but add the convention that wallet/account N is the same wallet in each supported currency? For example, if I have a wallet called business expenses, which happens to be wallet m / 44' / 0' / 5', for Bitcoin, then the same wallet would be m / 44' / 3' / 5' for Dogecoin, and m / 44' / 2' / 5' for Litecoin. I am trying to think of examples where your proposal is better than BIP 44, but I can't think of any. Even backup recovery works fine. I assume that your idea is to continue iterating over the different wallet indices as long as you are finding funds in *any* currency. Well, you can still do that with BIP 44. The fields are in a different order, but that doesn't affect the algorithm in any way. Maybe you have some deeper insight I'm not seeing, but if so, you need to clearly explain that in your motivation section. The current explanation, This limits the possible implementations of multi-currency, multisignature wallets, is pretty vauge. Also, there is nothing in this spec that addresses the multisignature use-case. The BIP 45 spec does a lot of extra work to make multisignature work smoothly. I'm not trying to criticize your proposal. I'm just trying to understand what it's trying to accomplish. -William Swanson On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Kefkius kefk...@maza.club wrote: I have a potential BIP, Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets. I'm requesting discussion on it, and possibly assignment of a BIP number. It's located in this github gist: https://gist.github.com/Kefkius/1aa02945e532f8739023 -- BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_ source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15utm_medium=emailutm_campaign=VA_SF ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises
[Bitcoin-development] Request For Discussion / BIP number - Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets
I have a potential BIP, Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets. I'm requesting discussion on it, and possibly assignment of a BIP number. It's located in this github gist: https://gist.github.com/Kefkius/1aa02945e532f8739023 -- BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_ source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15utm_medium=emailutm_campaign=VA_SF ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Request For Discussion / BIP number - Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets
It's not really clear why this is better than BIP 44 as it already stands. You have the same fields, but they are just in a different order. Couldn't you just use the existing BIP 44 hierarchy, but add the convention that wallet/account N is the same wallet in each supported currency? For example, if I have a wallet called business expenses, which happens to be wallet m / 44' / 0' / 5', for Bitcoin, then the same wallet would be m / 44' / 3' / 5' for Dogecoin, and m / 44' / 2' / 5' for Litecoin. I am trying to think of examples where your proposal is better than BIP 44, but I can't think of any. Even backup recovery works fine. I assume that your idea is to continue iterating over the different wallet indices as long as you are finding funds in *any* currency. Well, you can still do that with BIP 44. The fields are in a different order, but that doesn't affect the algorithm in any way. Maybe you have some deeper insight I'm not seeing, but if so, you need to clearly explain that in your motivation section. The current explanation, This limits the possible implementations of multi-currency, multisignature wallets, is pretty vauge. Also, there is nothing in this spec that addresses the multisignature use-case. The BIP 45 spec does a lot of extra work to make multisignature work smoothly. I'm not trying to criticize your proposal. I'm just trying to understand what it's trying to accomplish. -William Swanson On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Kefkius kefk...@maza.club wrote: I have a potential BIP, Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets. I'm requesting discussion on it, and possibly assignment of a BIP number. It's located in this github gist: https://gist.github.com/Kefkius/1aa02945e532f8739023 -- BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_ source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15utm_medium=emailutm_campaign=VA_SF ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_ source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15utm_medium=emailutm_campaign=VA_SF ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Request For Discussion / BIP number - Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets
William, I believe the reasoning for this is stated in the Coin Type section. Public derivation is used so that cosigners need only know one of each other's public keys, rather than needing to distribute public keys for each coin. BIP44 has a coin level, but it's a private derived level, so cosigners would not be able to generate multiple crypto currencies of each others' without giving each other n xpubs where n is the number of currencies shared. This new proposal basically sticks coin type on the public derivation side of things so that I could generate litecoin or darkcoin multisigs without your permission... Kefkius, This BIP seems like a good fit for multi-currency wallets based on multisig. So kudos for putting it in writing. However, I don't know if this is really a BIP thing. It's not improving Bitcoin (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal... remember?), in fact, by definition it is improving altcoin usability. For that reason alone I will say I disagree for a BIP for this. - Jona 2015-04-08 16:46 GMT+09:00 William Swanson swanson...@gmail.com: It's not really clear why this is better than BIP 44 as it already stands. You have the same fields, but they are just in a different order. Couldn't you just use the existing BIP 44 hierarchy, but add the convention that wallet/account N is the same wallet in each supported currency? For example, if I have a wallet called business expenses, which happens to be wallet m / 44' / 0' / 5', for Bitcoin, then the same wallet would be m / 44' / 3' / 5' for Dogecoin, and m / 44' / 2' / 5' for Litecoin. I am trying to think of examples where your proposal is better than BIP 44, but I can't think of any. Even backup recovery works fine. I assume that your idea is to continue iterating over the different wallet indices as long as you are finding funds in *any* currency. Well, you can still do that with BIP 44. The fields are in a different order, but that doesn't affect the algorithm in any way. Maybe you have some deeper insight I'm not seeing, but if so, you need to clearly explain that in your motivation section. The current explanation, This limits the possible implementations of multi-currency, multisignature wallets, is pretty vauge. Also, there is nothing in this spec that addresses the multisignature use-case. The BIP 45 spec does a lot of extra work to make multisignature work smoothly. I'm not trying to criticize your proposal. I'm just trying to understand what it's trying to accomplish. -William Swanson On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Kefkius kefk...@maza.club wrote: I have a potential BIP, Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets. I'm requesting discussion on it, and possibly assignment of a BIP number. It's located in this github gist: https://gist.github.com/Kefkius/1aa02945e532f8739023 -- BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_ source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15utm_medium=emailutm_campaign=VA_SF ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_ source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15utm_medium=emailutm_campaign=VA_SF ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Comment: http://openpgpjs.org xsBNBFTmJ8oBB/9rd+7XLxZG/x/KnhkVK2WBG8ySx91fs+qQfHIK1JrakSV3 x6x0cK3XLClASLLDomm7Od3Q/fMFzdwCEqj6z60T8wgKxsjWYSGL3mq8ucdv iBjC3wGauk5dQKtT7tkCFyQQbX/uMsBM4ccGBICoDmIJlwJIj7fAZVqGxGOM bO1RhYb4dbQA2qxYP7wSsHJ6/ZNAXyEphOj6blUzdqO0exAbCOZWWF+E/1SC EuKO4RmL7Imdep7uc2Qze1UpJCZx7ASHl2IZ4UD0G3Qr3pI6/jvNlaqCTa3U 3/YeJwEubFsd0AVy0zs809RcKKgX3W1q+hVDTeWinem9RiOG/vT+Eec/ABEB AAHNI2tpbm9zaGl0YSA8a2lub3NoaXRham9uYUBnbWFpbC5jb20+wsByBBAB CAAmBQJU5ifRBgsJCAcDAgkQRB9iZ30dlisEFQgCCgMWAgECGwMCHgEAAC6Z B/9otobf0ASHYdlUBeIPXdDopyjQhR2RiZGYaS0VZ5zzHYLDDMW6ZIYm5CjO Fc09ETLGKFxH2RcCOK2dzwz+KRU4xqOrt/l5gyd50cFE1nOhUN9+/XaPgrou WhyT9xLeGit7Xqhht93z2+VanTtJAG6lWbAZLIZAMGMuLX6sJDCO0GiO5zxa 02Q2D3kh5GL57A5+oVOna12JBRaIA5eBGKVCp3KToT/z48pxBe3WAmLo0zXr
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Request For Discussion / BIP number - Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets
Oops, sorry I missed that. Since that's the reason this proposal exists, I would consider putting it right up top where people can see it. Also, since this proposal is specifically designed for multi-sig, I would look at what BIP45 is doing and maybe incorporate a cosigner_index branch. Otherwise, this idea seems like a reasonable way to organize a wallet. -William On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 9:28 AM, 木ノ下じょな kinoshitaj...@gmail.com wrote: William, I believe the reasoning for this is stated in the Coin Type section. Public derivation is used so that cosigners need only know one of each other's public keys, rather than needing to distribute public keys for each coin. BIP44 has a coin level, but it's a private derived level, so cosigners would not be able to generate multiple crypto currencies of each others' without giving each other n xpubs where n is the number of currencies shared. This new proposal basically sticks coin type on the public derivation side of things so that I could generate litecoin or darkcoin multisigs without your permission... Kefkius, This BIP seems like a good fit for multi-currency wallets based on multisig. So kudos for putting it in writing. However, I don't know if this is really a BIP thing. It's not improving Bitcoin (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal... remember?), in fact, by definition it is improving altcoin usability. For that reason alone I will say I disagree for a BIP for this. - Jona 2015-04-08 16:46 GMT+09:00 William Swanson swanson...@gmail.com: It's not really clear why this is better than BIP 44 as it already stands. You have the same fields, but they are just in a different order. Couldn't you just use the existing BIP 44 hierarchy, but add the convention that wallet/account N is the same wallet in each supported currency? For example, if I have a wallet called business expenses, which happens to be wallet m / 44' / 0' / 5', for Bitcoin, then the same wallet would be m / 44' / 3' / 5' for Dogecoin, and m / 44' / 2' / 5' for Litecoin. I am trying to think of examples where your proposal is better than BIP 44, but I can't think of any. Even backup recovery works fine. I assume that your idea is to continue iterating over the different wallet indices as long as you are finding funds in *any* currency. Well, you can still do that with BIP 44. The fields are in a different order, but that doesn't affect the algorithm in any way. Maybe you have some deeper insight I'm not seeing, but if so, you need to clearly explain that in your motivation section. The current explanation, This limits the possible implementations of multi-currency, multisignature wallets, is pretty vauge. Also, there is nothing in this spec that addresses the multisignature use-case. The BIP 45 spec does a lot of extra work to make multisignature work smoothly. I'm not trying to criticize your proposal. I'm just trying to understand what it's trying to accomplish. -William Swanson On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Kefkius kefk...@maza.club wrote: I have a potential BIP, Multi-Currency Hierarchy For Use In Multisignature Deterministic Wallets. I'm requesting discussion on it, and possibly assignment of a BIP number. It's located in this github gist: https://gist.github.com/Kefkius/1aa02945e532f8739023 -- BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_ source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15utm_medium=emailutm_campaign=VA_SF ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
