Pavol Rusnak [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2017-09-07 📝 Original message:On 07/09/17 06:29, Thomas ...
📅 Original date posted:2017-09-07
📝 Original message:On 07/09/17 06:29, Thomas Voegtlin via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> A solution is still needed to wallets who do not wish to use BIP43
What if we added another byte field OutputType for wallets that do not
follow BIP43?
0x00 - P2PKH output type
0x01 - P2WPKH-in-P2SH output type
0x02 - native Segwit output type
Would that work for you?
The question is whether this field should be present only if depth==0x00
or at all times. What is your suggestion, Thomas?
--
Best Regards / S pozdravom,
Pavol "stick" Rusnak
CTO, SatoshiLabs
📝 Original message:On 07/09/17 06:29, Thomas Voegtlin via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> A solution is still needed to wallets who do not wish to use BIP43
What if we added another byte field OutputType for wallets that do not
follow BIP43?
0x00 - P2PKH output type
0x01 - P2WPKH-in-P2SH output type
0x02 - native Segwit output type
Would that work for you?
The question is whether this field should be present only if depth==0x00
or at all times. What is your suggestion, Thomas?
--
Best Regards / S pozdravom,
Pavol "stick" Rusnak
CTO, SatoshiLabs