Btc Drak [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01 📝 Original message:On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at ...
📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01
📝 Original message:On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Danny Thorpe via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Rather than using an inhumanly long hex string from the genesis hash to
> distinguish between mainnet and testnet, why not use the network magic bytes
> instead? Much shorter, just as distinct.
There's nothing stopping two coins having the same magic bytes, but
communicating on separate ports.
> I'd still prefer a common network name mapping for the sake of humanity. Few
> bitcoin library implementations use the same string names for mainnet and
> testnet. This BIP could simply define one string name alias for each
> supported network and leave mapping to local lingo to the implementors.
The only sane way to me see to have cointype like BIP44.
See https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0044.mediawiki#coin-type
📝 Original message:On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Danny Thorpe via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Rather than using an inhumanly long hex string from the genesis hash to
> distinguish between mainnet and testnet, why not use the network magic bytes
> instead? Much shorter, just as distinct.
There's nothing stopping two coins having the same magic bytes, but
communicating on separate ports.
> I'd still prefer a common network name mapping for the sake of humanity. Few
> bitcoin library implementations use the same string names for mainnet and
> testnet. This BIP could simply define one string name alias for each
> supported network and leave mapping to local lingo to the implementors.
The only sane way to me see to have cointype like BIP44.
See https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0044.mediawiki#coin-type