It is true that BIP 327 ("MuSig2") does not include adaptor signatures. The
rationale behind this decision was as follows:
- the BIP is already long and complicated enough without adaptor signatures; it
should be possible to propose a separate adaptor signature BIP on top in a
modular fashion
On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 11:59:16PM +, Andrew Chow via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On 10/11/2023 07:47 PM, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 10:28:37PM +, Andrew Chow via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> >> I've written up a BIP draft for MuSig2 PSBT fields. It can be viewed at
> >> https://gith
On 10/11/2023 07:47 PM, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 10:28:37PM +, Andrew Chow via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> I've written up a BIP draft for MuSig2 PSBT fields. It can be viewed at
>> https://github.com/achow101/bips/blob/musig2-psbt/bip-musig2-psbt.mediawiki.
>
> I was hoping to
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 10:28:37PM +, Andrew Chow via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I've written up a BIP draft for MuSig2 PSBT fields. It can be viewed at
> https://github.com/achow101/bips/blob/musig2-psbt/bip-musig2-psbt.mediawiki.
I was hoping to see adaptor signature support in this; but it seems
Hi All,
I've written up a BIP draft for MuSig2 PSBT fields. It can be viewed at
https://github.com/achow101/bips/blob/musig2-psbt/bip-musig2-psbt.mediawiki.
This is based on this gist from Sanket:
https://gist.github.com/sanket1729/4b525c6049f4d9e034d27368c49f28a6.
There are a few notable diff
