Seeking feedback on a proposal that will allow a transaction signer to
explicitly specify what is to be serialized for the signature hash. The
basic idea is to make the nHashType general enough that we won't need a new
sighash flag every time a new use case comes up.
If implemented into bitcoin (v
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. Otherwis
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 co
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 exampl
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
5 matches
Mail list logo
