Author: shiva sitamraju 2017-09-06 05:20:31
Published on: 2017-09-06T05:20:31+00:00
In an email exchange on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, a user asks Thomas Voegtlin to explain why P2WPKH nested in BIP16 P2SH requires a different version than P2WPKH. The user questions whether both would generate the same Bitcoin address in txout and hence be in the same wallet account. Pavol Rusnak responds that he is fine with both Thomas' proposal and the user's proposal and urges the group to decide which one to use soon. The discussion then moves on to the proposed changes to BIP32 serialization format and the need for three types of keys, not two, because there are two types of segwit output scripts: native and nested in p2sh. Thomas proposes using letters z, y, and z combined with pub/prv, while Luke Dashjr thinks it makes more sense to use a child number field for this purpose. In another thread, Chris Stewart discusses the idea of sidechain headers on mainchain and how it works, raising concerns about the possibility of an invalid transaction killing off any consensus valid chain that sidechain miners are trying to construct. He recommends incentivizing miners to work together by making the coinbase maturity period on the sidechain longer than 288. Finally, Thomas responds to the conversation and shares his own proposal for three different versions of P2WPKH nested in BIP16 P2SH for testnet and mainnet.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T15:18:48.827033+00:00