From: Thomas Voegtlin <thomasv1@gmx•de>
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] New BIP32 structure
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:04:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53343DFF.2070406@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJna-HitjJbL9TnfxTY=+TvfaeNvZM6aPWmNYmHUCwmw6V8PUg@mail.gmail.com>
>
> Related to this, here is another idea I would like to submit:
>
> Instead of using a "gap limit" (maximal number of consecutive unused
> addresses), I think we should get rid of the topology, and simply count
> the number of unused addresses since the beginning of the sequence.
> Indeed, the topology of the sequence of addresses is of no interest to
> the user. Users often misinterpret "gap limit" as the "number of unused
> addresses available", so I think we should just give them what they want
> :) This is easier to understand, and it makes things more predictable,
> because the wallet will always display the same number of unused
> addresses (except when it is waiting for confirmations).
>
>
> I'm not convinced that it is either simpler to implement nor simpler to
> understand. I considering every "account" as completely independent
> structure (except that it has been derived from master seed). Because of
> this, I don't see a reason why number of generated addresses in one
> account should affect available addresses of other account.
Sorry if I was not clear, but no, I was not proposing that... I propose
to count the number of unused addresses in each account, independently.
Here is an explanation with pictures:
Currently, Electrum does this:
x = used address
o = unused address
x x x o o x x x x o o o o o
| └───────┘ 5 unused addresses at the end (gap limit =5)
existing gap, size 2
Case 1:
Suppose the user decides to use the 4th address starting from the end:
x x x o o x x x x x o o o o
After 3 confirmations, Electrum will create one extra address:
x x x o o x x x x x o o o o o
└───────┘ 5 final address (one new)
Case 2:
The user, who understands nothing about topology, decides to use the
final address:
x x x o o x x x x o o o o x
After 3 confirmations, Electrum will create 5 new addresses:
x x x o o x x x x o o o o x o o o o o
| └───────┘ 5 new addresses
new gap (size 4)
You see that this leads to a number of newly created addresses that
depends on the address picked by the user. This is the behaviour that I
want to fix. I think it is bad for two reasons: First, because it is
unpredictable (I had a user who set his gap limit to 100, and then was
systematically using the last address of the list, ending up with a lot
of wasted addresses). Second, because the worst case scenario (case 2)
creates large gaps, which are less robust to blockchain reorgs than in
case 1. A reorg in case 1, where the last tx is cancelled will create no
gap. A reorg in case 2 can result in a gap that is larger than the limit
(5), if another transaction uses the final addresses. (this is why
Electrum has to wait for a few confirmations before adding addresses)
So, what I propose is to always have a constant number of unused
addresses in each account, instead of something that depends on the
topology. (this number can be 10 or 20, I don't mind, but I guess Mike
might prefer 20...)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-27 15:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 100+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-26 20:49 Mike Hearn
2014-03-26 23:37 ` Andreas Schildbach
2014-03-27 1:01 ` Alan Reiner
2014-03-27 6:15 ` Mike Belshe
2014-03-27 10:57 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-03-27 11:39 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-27 13:30 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-03-27 13:38 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-27 1:13 ` Allen Piscitello
2014-03-27 5:34 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2014-03-27 7:09 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-27 9:42 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-27 11:35 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-03-27 15:43 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-03-27 15:57 ` Allen Piscitello
2014-03-27 16:06 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-03-27 16:13 ` Allen Piscitello
2014-03-27 16:07 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-27 16:14 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-03-27 16:21 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-03-27 16:28 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-03-27 17:49 ` Allen Piscitello
2014-03-28 14:59 ` slush
2014-04-08 12:43 ` slush
2014-04-08 13:18 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-08 13:40 ` slush
2014-04-08 13:43 ` slush
2014-04-08 13:53 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-08 13:59 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-04-08 14:00 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-08 14:35 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-08 15:41 ` slush
2014-04-23 17:42 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-23 18:01 ` slush
2014-04-23 18:18 ` slush
2014-04-23 18:39 ` Tier Nolan
2014-04-23 18:46 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 19:00 ` Tier Nolan
2014-04-23 19:06 ` slush
2014-04-23 19:36 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-23 19:46 ` slush
2014-04-23 19:07 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-23 19:29 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 19:44 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 19:49 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 19:55 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 19:57 ` slush
2014-04-23 20:01 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 20:04 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 20:09 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 20:16 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 20:32 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 20:35 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 20:41 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 20:43 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 20:54 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-23 21:06 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 21:18 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 21:22 ` Gregory Maxwell
2014-04-23 21:33 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 21:42 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-23 21:44 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 21:48 ` Gregory Maxwell
2014-04-23 21:53 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 21:24 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-23 21:07 ` slush
2014-04-23 20:59 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 20:17 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-23 20:12 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-23 20:08 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-23 20:01 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-23 20:02 ` Luke-Jr
2014-04-23 20:04 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-24 6:54 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-04-24 7:10 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-24 7:21 ` Gregory Maxwell
2014-04-24 8:15 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-04-24 7:42 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-04-24 8:09 ` Mike Hearn
2014-04-23 18:48 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-08 14:49 ` Andreas Schildbach
2014-04-08 15:46 ` slush
2014-04-08 15:58 ` Andreas Schildbach
2014-04-08 16:24 ` slush
2014-03-27 11:20 ` Thomas Voegtlin
[not found] ` <CAJna-HhmFya+3W67qQt0wMhW=B4vJvwdkr-5WnU+KEaKq7uaUA@mail.gmail.com>
2014-03-27 12:06 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-03-27 12:28 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-27 12:49 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-27 13:12 ` Thomas Kerin
2014-03-27 13:19 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-27 13:49 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-03-27 13:58 ` Jim
2014-03-27 14:20 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-27 15:17 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2014-03-27 13:07 ` Matias Alejo Garcia
2014-03-27 13:44 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-03-27 13:53 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-03-27 14:03 ` Pavol Rusnak
[not found] ` <CAJna-HitjJbL9TnfxTY=+TvfaeNvZM6aPWmNYmHUCwmw6V8PUg@mail.gmail.com>
2014-03-27 15:04 ` Thomas Voegtlin [this message]
2014-03-27 11:36 ` Pavol Rusnak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53343DFF.2070406@gmx.de \
--to=thomasv1@gmx$(echo .)de \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox