BIP 360 - Pay to Merkle Root (P2MR)#1670
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Interesting (the question of resistance to quantum computing may have resurged lately with the publication of https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8329, see also https://x.com/n1ckler/status/1839215426091249778).
cryptoquick
force-pushed
the
p2qrh
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b6ed2c3 to
d6d15ad
Compare
cryptoquick
force-pushed
the
p2qrh
branch
2 times, most recently
from
0608cc1 to
a595bf0
Compare
cryptoquick
force-pushed
the
p2qrh
branch
2 times, most recently
from
19d4592 to
7f4456d
Compare
|
@cryptoquick Can you begin to write up the sections currently marked as TBD, along with a backwards compatibility section (to describe incompatibilities, severity, and suggest mitigations, where applicable/relevant)? We've begun to reserve a range of BIP numbers for this topic, pending continued progress here. |
jonatack
added
the
PR Author action required
|
@cryptoquick ping for an update here. Have you seen https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/p8xz08YTvkw / https://github.com/chucrut/bips/blob/master/bip-xxxx.md? It may be interesting to review each other and possibly collaborate. |
|
@cryptoquick @murchandamus Renamed to P2MR and marked as complete |
EthanHeilman
force-pushed
the
p2qrh
branch
5 times, most recently
from
b72d13a to
f76c25f
Compare
murchandamus
left a comment
murchandamus
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It’s a bit unusual to advance the BIP to Complete before publication. I would recommend merging as Draft and advancing to Complete in a few weeks if the reviews prompted by publication don’t turn up any further changes or those changes have been addressed. Either way is fine, though.
| Test vector data for creation of P2MR UTXOs can be found [https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0360/ref-impl/common/tests/data/P2MR_construction.json here]. | ||
|
|
||
| These test vectors build off of the test vectors for [[bip-0341.mediawiki|BIP 341]] (Taproot). One important distinction is that the P2TSH test vectors do not include keypath spend scenarios. | ||
| These test vectors build off of the test vectors for [[bip-0341.mediawiki|BIP 341]] (Taproot). One important distinction is that the P2MR test vectors do not include keypath spend scenarios. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you don’t, it might be good to have a test case in which someone uses a P2TR construction with version 2 and that it fails.
| | Pay-to-Merkle-Root (P2MR) | ||
| | Hunter Beast, Ethan Heilman, Isabel Foxen Duke | ||
| | Specification | ||
| | Draft |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mismatch here: Preamble is Complete, here it’s Draft.
EthanHeilman
force-pushed
the
p2qrh
branch
3 times, most recently
from
df0feef to
f5aa4d9
Compare
@murchandamus Sounds good, reverted to draft. |
cryptoquick
changed the title
murchandamus
removed
the
PR Author action required
|
Was just taking another look at this. I noticed two things:
|
Thank you. |
|
@murchandamus We got the test vectors updates knocked out sooner than I thought, would you prefer we hold off on merging as originally planned or should we just get them into this one? See: |
|
If you have it ready, just merge it in here. I’ll wait with the publication until you tell me that it’s ready from your side. |
* P2TSH: Taptree can now be populated with a mix of leaves secured either via Schnorr based locking script or SLH-DSA based locking script * P2TSH: Improved docs and variable names * p2tsh: even more improvements to docs for Rust implementation * p2tsh rust: now using libbitcoinpqc bindings package (segregated from core C implementation) * bip360: p2tsh -> p2mr * BIP360: Test that P2TR uses only witness version 1 bitcoin#1670 (comment)
|
It is done. |
--------- Co-authored-by: Ethan Heilman <ethan.r.heilman@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Isabel Foxen Duke <isabelfoxenduke@users.noreply.github.com> Review comments and assistance by: Armin Sabouri <armins88@gmail.com> D++ <82842780+dplusplus1024@users.noreply.github.com> Jameson Lopp <jameson.lopp@gmail.com> jbride <jbride2001@yahoo.com> Joey Yandle <xoloki@gmail.com> Jon Atack <jon@atack.com> Jonas Nick <jonasd.nick@gmail.com> Kyle Crews <kylecrews@Kyles-Mac-Studio.local> Mark "Murch" Erhardt <murch@murch.one> notmike-5 <notmike-5@users.noreply.github.com> Vojtěch Strnad <43024885+vostrnad@users.noreply.github.com>
Review comments and assistance by: Armin Sabouri <armins88@gmail.com> D++ <82842780+dplusplus1024@users.noreply.github.com> Jameson Lopp <jameson.lopp@gmail.com> jbride <jbride2001@yahoo.com> Joey Yandle <xoloki@gmail.com> Jon Atack <jon@atack.com> Jonas Nick <jonasd.nick@gmail.com> Kyle Crews <kylecrews@Kyles-Mac-Studio.local> Mark "Murch" Erhardt <murch@murch.one> notmike-5 <notmike-5@users.noreply.github.com> Vojtěch Strnad <43024885+vostrnad@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ethan Heilman <ethan.r.heilman@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Isabel Foxen Duke <110147802+Isabelfoxenduke@users.noreply.github.com>
20 participants
This spent several months gathering feedback from the mailing list and from other advisors. This is hopefully polished enough to submit upstream.
Let me know if you have any questions or feedback, and of course feel free to submit suggestions.
Thank you for your time.