"James O'Beirne" <james.obei...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 12:51 AM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> But AFAICT there are multiple perfectly reasonable variants of vaults, >> too. One would be: >> >> 1. master key can do anything >> 2. OR normal key can send back to vault addr without delay >> 3. OR normal key can do anything else after a delay. >> >> Another would be: >> 1. normal key can send to P2WPKH(master) >> 2. OR normal key can send to P2WPKH(normal key) after a delay. >> > > I'm confused by what you mean here. I'm pretty sure that BIP-345 VAULT > handles the cases that you're outlining, though I don't understand your > terminology -- "master" vs. "normal", and why we are caring about P2WPKH > vs. anything else. Using the OP_VAULT* codes can be done in an arbitrary > arrangement of tapleaves, facilitating any number of vaultish spending > conditions, alongside other non-VAULT leaves.
I was thinking from a user POV: the "master" key is the one they keep super safe in case of emergencies, the "normal" is the delayed spend key. OP_VAULT certainly can encapsulate this, but I have yet to do the kind of thorough review that I'd need to evaluate the various design decisions. > Well, I found the vault BIP really hard to understand. I think it wants >> to be a new address format, not script opcodes. >> > > Again confused here. This is like saying "CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY wants to be a > new address format, not a script opcode." I mean in an ideal world, Bitcoin Script would be powerful enough to implement vaults, and once a popular use pattern emerged we'd introduce a new address type, defined to expand to that template. Like P2WPK or P2PKH. Sadly, we're not in that world! BIP 345 introduces a number of separate mechanisms, such as limited script delegation, iteration and amount arithmetic which are not expressible in Script (ok, amount arithmetic kind of is, but ick!). To form a real opinion, I need to consider all these elements, and whether they should exist inside OP_VAULT, or as separate things. That's a slow process, sorry :( > That said, I'm sure some VAULT patterns could be abstracted into the > miniscript/descriptor layer to good effect. That would be very interesting, but hard. Volunteers? :) Cheers, Rusty. _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
