could be allowed
> to be selected to slowly drain low-value UTXO out of the wallet by
> spending them over time. In order to avoid the privacy issues such as
> e.g. always spending the oldest UTXO, it would for example be possible
> to implement this as a 75% probability to prune an unn
Hi,
Is your simulation code available somewhere?
I was just wondering why mycelium generates a very big UTXO set for <1000sat,
because change outputs will never be smaller than
5460sat (=TransactionUtils.MINIMUM_OUTPUT_VALUE). If the change would be lower,
it simply is skipped and added to the
] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0142.mediawiki
On 2016-06-14 17:41, Daniel Weigl via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Hi List,
>
> Following up to the discussion last month (
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012695.html
> ), ive prepared a pro
l"
send-to-single-address transactions
to always use the same output type for the change output (if the wallet is able
to recognize it)
Daniel
On 2016-06-15 12:26, Jochen Hoenicke wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
>
> Am 14.06.2016 um 17:41 schrieb Daniel Weigl via bitcoin-dev:
Hi List,
Following up to the discussion last month (
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012695.html ),
ive prepared a proposal for a BIP here:
https://github.com/DanielWeigl/bips/blob/master/bip-p2sh-accounts.mediawiki
Any comments on it? Does an
le address types for each key.
>
> Aaron Voisine co-founder and CEO breadwallet
> <http://breadwallet.com>
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:00 AM, Pavol Rusnak via bitcoin-dev
> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>
> On 13/05/16 15:16, Daniel Weig
Hello List,
With SegWit approaching it would make sense to define a common derivation
scheme how BIP44 compatible wallets will handle P2(W)SH (and later on P2WPKH)
receiving addresses.
I was thinking about starting a BIP for it, but I wanted to get some feedback
from other wallets devs first.
