On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> I've pinged some people privately but also pinging the list… no
> commentary on this proposal?
One possible reason is that non-subscribed users aren't able to access
the file through sourceforge. The attachment through their web
interface
I'm in favor of BIP43.
Adding a "Purpose" node can be used as an identifier for what kind of
tree is in the wallet file we're reading. I can envision a few
different, common tree structures. Perhaps using a non-hardened
first-layer derivation (we have clients who want this). Similarly, my
prop
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 09/26/2014 01:53 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Justus Ranvier
> wrote:
>> Two draft information BIPs are attached.
>
> I've pinged some people privately but also pinging the list… no
> commentary on this proposa
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Justus Ranvier wrote:
> Two draft information BIPs are attached.
I've pinged some people privately but also pinging the list… no
commentary on this proposal?
--
Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Complian
4 matches
Mail list logo
