rich1.0npub1sm6zhjmk5scuz294jmpkw99wwwjzetjgwp4fu4gn6utqgdz87hkqamnq7hhttps://nostr.ae/npub1sm6zhjmk5scuz294jmpkw99wwwjzetjgwp4fu4gn6utqgdz87hkqamnq7hnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2014-03-10 📝 Original message:As far as I'm concerned, the way forward is to scrap BIP 10 and build up something new that is flexible and extensible. Also, my understanding is that there may be room in the payment protocol for this stuff though I'm not sure if it is really adapted well to all the steps: exchanging public keys, creating multi-sig/P2SH addresses, proposing multi-sig spends, bundling meta-data needed for lite/offline nodes, aggregating signatures, and any other details. When I start multisig integration into Armory (very soon!) I'll write a list of requirements for the new format/process and post it here for a wider discussion. Certainly, if the payment protocol can already handle all this, that would be awesome. -Alan On 03/10/2014 08:04 PM, kjj wrote: > I was trying to use bip10 for multisig and coinjoin, but there was a > problem with it. I'll have to look back at my notes, but I thought I > sent you a message about it. And then real life swallowed my bitcoin > time... > > I think the bottom line was that it would be useful in the generic > case with just one minor change. If there is interest, and it sounds > like there just may be, I can dust off my notes and see where I left > it. Probably should do it soon before someone implements it in PB or XML. > > Alan Reiner wrote: >> Then of course I tried to do this with BIP 10 >> <https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0010.mediawiki> when >> Armory implemented offline-transactions two years ago. I got some >> positive feedback, but no one wanted to help improve it, etc. I >> guess nobody else was doing it and/or cared at the time. So I >> continue to use BIP 10 even though it's pretty crappy. I wanted it >> to be useful for multisig, too, but it has some deficiencies there >> (it was done when Armory was extremely young and OP_EVAL was still on >> the table). >> >> However, with all this activity, we should start thinking about that >> and discussing it. Otherwise, I'll just do my own thing again and >> probably end up with something that fits my own needs, but not anyone >> else's. Really though, multisig shouldn't require all the same app >> to work. >> >> -Alan >> >> >> On 03/10/2014 01:49 PM, Gavin Andresen wrote: >>> In my experience, best process for standardizing something is: >>> >>> 1) Somebody has a great idea >>> 2) They implement it >>> 3) Everybody agrees, "Great idea!" and they copy it. >>> 4) Idea gets refined by the people copying it. >>> 5) It gets standardized. >>> >>> Mutisig wallets are at step 2 right now. BIP is step 5, in my humble >>> opinion... >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Drak <drak at zikula.org >>> <mailto:drak at zikula.org>> wrote: >>> >>> I was wondering if there would be merit in a kind of BIP for a >>> payment protocol using multisig? >>> >>> Currently, setting up a multisig is quite a feat. Users have to >>> exchange public keys, work out how to get the public keys from >>> their addresses. If one of the parties are not savvy enough, an >>> malicious party could easily be setup that was 2 of 3 instead of >>> 2 of 2 where the malicious party generates the multisig >>> address+script and thus be able to run off with funds anyway. >>> >>> It's also terribly complex to generate and keep track of. >>> There's been a nice attempt at creating an browser interface at >>> coinb.in/multisig <http://coinb.in/multisig> but it still lacks >>> the kind of ease with created by the payment protocol. If there >>> was a BIP then it would go a long way to aiding future usability >>> of multisig wallet implementations. >>> >>> What are your thoughts? >>> >>> Drak >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases >>> and their >>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bitcoin-development mailing list >>> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net >>> <mailto:Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- >>> Gavin Andresen >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their >>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bitcoin-development mailing list >>> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bitcoin-development mailing list >> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140310/0f32ee9e/attachment.html>