From: "James O'Beirne" <james.obeirne@gmail•com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp•com.au>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Examining ScriptPubkeys in Bitcoin Script
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:20:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPfvXfK7a5To=-n+TOY34KZn2T=Dkf5M1S3eFCNmug8xuE9rTw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r0lfz6zp.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1288 bytes --]
On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 12:51 AM Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> But AFAICT there are multiple perfectly reasonable variants of vaults,
> too. One would be:
>
> 1. master key can do anything
> 2. OR normal key can send back to vault addr without delay
> 3. OR normal key can do anything else after a delay.
>
> Another would be:
> 1. normal key can send to P2WPKH(master)
> 2. OR normal key can send to P2WPKH(normal key) after a delay.
>
I'm confused by what you mean here. I'm pretty sure that BIP-345 VAULT
handles the cases that you're outlining, though I don't understand your
terminology -- "master" vs. "normal", and why we are caring about P2WPKH
vs. anything else. Using the OP_VAULT* codes can be done in an arbitrary
arrangement of tapleaves, facilitating any number of vaultish spending
conditions, alongside other non-VAULT leaves.
Well, I found the vault BIP really hard to understand. I think it wants
> to be a new address format, not script opcodes.
>
Again confused here. This is like saying "CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY wants to be a
new address format, not a script opcode."
That said, I'm sure some VAULT patterns could be abstracted into the
miniscript/descriptor layer to good effect.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1834 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-30 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-20 3:40 Rusty Russell
2023-10-20 14:19 ` Brandon Black
2023-10-22 4:16 ` Rusty Russell
2023-10-27 7:00 ` Anthony Towns
2023-10-28 4:49 ` Rusty Russell
2023-10-30 16:20 ` James O'Beirne [this message]
2023-10-31 2:24 ` Rusty Russell
2023-10-31 13:05 ` Anthony Towns
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='CAPfvXfK7a5To=-n+TOY34KZn2T=Dkf5M1S3eFCNmug8xuE9rTw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=james.obeirne@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp$(echo .)com.au \
/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