Published on: 2017-08-30T12:48:24+00:00
In an email sent to the bitcoin-dev mailing list, Simone Bronzini discussed the issue of mixing SegWit and non-SegWit addresses on the same BIP44 structure. This mixture could cause problems with the recognition of unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs) by old wallets. As a solution, Bronzini proposed the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 49, which suggested separating the key space for SegWit addresses to avoid this issue. However, it was pointed out that this separation would lead to old UTXOs not being recognized by new wallets as they discard support for old standards over time.To address this problem, the suggestion was made to move away from bip39 and bip43 and include a version number in the mnemonic seed. The idea of versioning on mnemonic seeds was considered useful and recommended to be discussed separately.Bronzini also proposed a new structure to facilitate the management of different multisig accounts under the same master key. This proposal aims to improve multi-account management, particularly for handling multiple payment channels now that Lightning Network (LN) is becoming a reality. The draft of the BIP can be found on GitHub, and feedback is highly appreciated, especially regarding issues such as the coin_type level and SegWit addresses.Regarding the coin_type level, objections have been raised about the proposal's consideration of alt-coins since it is a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal. However, having a coin_type level improves interoperability with multi-currency wallets without major drawbacks. Additionally, even a Bitcoin maximalist may hold multiple coins for various reasons, such as short-term speculation or testing.Furthermore, the proposal addresses the concern of mixing SegWit and non-SegWit addresses on the same BIP44 structure, which could result in UTXOs not being completely recognized by old wallets. Two possible solutions were suggested: creating separate purposes for SegWit and non-SegWit addresses or introducing a new level in the proposed structure to divide SegWit and non-SegWit addresses. The latter solution would allow for a multisig wallet with non-SegWit-aware cosigners without the need for two different subtrees.The proposal is still a work in progress, and feedback is needed before it can be submitted as a BIP draft. Simone Bronzini is the author of the email and welcomes input from the community.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T21:32:08.647487+00:00