Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for deterministic pay-to-script-hash multi-signature addresses
The idea is more like BIP44/45 to have a 'standard' that software can comply by and express they do so that it makes a step towards compatibility between (wallet) software. On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote: On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:13:33PM +, Luke Dashjr wrote: Where is the Specification section?? Does this support arbitrary scripts, or only the simplest CHECKMULTISIG case? It might be enough to rewrite this BIP to basically say all pubkeys executed by all CHECKMULTISIG opcodes will be in the following canonical order, followed by some explanatory examples of how to apply this simple rule. OTOH we don't yet have a standard way of even talking about arbitrary scripts, so it may very well turn out to be the case that the above rule is too restrictive in many cases - I certainly would not want to do a soft-fork to enforce this, or even make it an IsStandard() rule. -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 13cf8270118ba2efce8b304f8de359599fef95c3ab43dcb1 -- BlockTrail B.V. Barbara Strozzilaan 201 1083HN Amsterdam The Netherlands Phone: +31 (0)612227277 E-mail: ru...@blocktrail.com Web: www.blocktrail.com Github: www.github.com/rubensayshi BlockTrail B.V. Is registered with the Dutch Chamber of Commerce in Amsterdam with registration No.:60262060 and VAT No.:NL853833035B01 -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions
Since we only need the sorting for creating the scriptPubKey, wouldn't it make the most sense to sort it by the way it represented in that context? On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Matt Whitlock b...@mattwhitlock.name wrote: On Wednesday, 14 January 2015, at 3:53 pm, Eric Lombrozo wrote: Internally, pubkeys are DER-encoded integers. I thought pubkeys were represented as raw integers (i.e., they're embedded in Script as a push operation whose payload is the raw bytes of the big-endian representation of the integer). As far as I know, DER encoding is only used for signatures. Am I mistaken? OP_CHECKSIG (and OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY) takes a DER-encoded pubkey and a DER-encoded signature on the stack. Possibly you're confused with OP_HASH160 hash160 OP_EQUALVERIFY as used in outputs, which compares the 160-bit hash of the pubkey against the given hash (usually taken from a bitcoin address). It doesn't help understanding to consider either as integers. They are binary blob objects with either a fixed format (DER) or a fixed size (hashes). Wladimir -- BlockTrail B.V. Barbara Strozzilaan 201 1083HN Amsterdam The Netherlands Phone: +31 (0)612227277 E-mail: ru...@blocktrail.com Web: www.blocktrail.com Github: www.github.com/rubensayshi BlockTrail B.V. Is registered with the Dutch Chamber of Commerce in Amsterdam with registration No.:60262060 and VAT No.:NL853833035B01 -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
