[Bitcoin-ml] Proposal to deploy cashaddr January, 14

Wed Nov 15 23:29:35 UTC 2017

Thanks Amaury for putting this proposal together!

It seems using a different format from the other chain is the most
important requirement (+ easily distinguishable by humans).  As Chris
mentioned, migrating to just a different address version (C/H) would be the
easiest to implement. IMHO, most of the new features the new format brings
are not quite relevant, but this one:

> " current outputs are using 160 bits hashes for multiparty contracts such
as multisig, which is really playing with the limit of what can be
considered secure."

Could you please explain that a little more or share a link with more
information on the subject?

thanks!

matías

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Chris Pacia via bitcoin-ml <
bitcoin-ml at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> So this is just my two cents. The cashaddr is nice, but substantially more
> difficult to implement than the alternatives. I've spent a few hours now
> working on it and still don't have it working. It would have been a two
> minute change to create the bitpay addr for example.
>
> Not saying it shouldn't be used, but the adoption speed is going to depend
> on how easy people find it to implement and the speed at which people get
> libraries out there.
>
> On 11/14/2017 07:25 PM, Amaury Séchet via bitcoin-ml wrote:
>
> Dear Bitcoin Cash community,
>
> Bitcoin Cash has been in need for a new address format for quite some
> time. There is an immediate problem as people mistakenly send BCH to BTC
> address and vice versa, which is made worse by the fact that segwit on the
> BTC chain had the brilliant idea to leverage outputs that anyone can spend,
> which make the recovery of the funds delicate on the Bitcoin Cash chain.
>
> Because this need is pressing, companies like Bitpay started using
> incompatible addresses format and this is causing fragmentation in the
> Bitcoin Cash ecosystem. I do not wish to blame Bitpay, they took action to
> solve the problem their business faces, this is good business from their
> part.
>
> However, while the problem of funds sent on the wrong chain is pressing,
> there are other reasons we need to update the address format. It is
> imperative that the chosen standard for Bitcoin Cash address the various
> issues present with the current address format as we cannot change
> addresses every other tuesday. The most important one being that current
> outputs are using 160 bits hashes for multiparty contracts such as
> multisig, which is really playing with the limit of what can be considered
> secure. It is also desirable that the format chosen can accommodate new
> features we wish to deploy, or, in other terms, be extensible.
>
> As a result, I propose to upgrade to the cashaddr format. This format (
> https://github.com/Bitcoin-UAHF/spec/blob/master/cashaddr.md ) is based
> on work from Rusty Russel ( https://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=578 ) and uses
> BCH codes in order to ensure error detection as suggested by Pieter Wuille
> for bech32.
>
> Using a new format will prevent users from mistakenly sending money on the
> wrong chain. It also accept payloads up to 512 bits which ensures we can
> deploy more secure way of doing multiparty smart contract in the future.
> Finally, it uses a version field ensuring we can encode new features in
> these addresses in the future without having to use a new format.
>
> In addition of these must have features, cashaddr improve on several
> aspects of current address format in a way that may not justify in itself
> to use a new format, but are nevertheless really nice to have.
>  - It uses a very strong checksum which ensure detection of up to 6 errors
> in an address and 8 in ‘burst’. Larger number of errors have one chance
> over a thousand billion to lead to a valid address.
>  - It encode more compactly in QR codes as it allows the use of the
> alphanumeric mode.
>  - It is much faster to encode and decode than the previous format, which
> is important for system having to handle a large number of addresses.
>
> In order to reduce confusion for users with the use of different
> addresses, I think it is important to deploy this shortly and stop the
> fragmentation of the ecosystem. Deploying such a change on the network will
> take some time for all wallet, exchanges and merchant to upgrade. Christmas
> and new year is coming soon and nobody want to do such an upgrade during
> this time. As a result, I propose we aim for a deployment around Jan, 14 .
> This leaves 2 month for everybody to get ready which I think is reasonable.
> Delaying further would push us into the Chinese new year territory, which
> is also undesirable.
>
> The next version of Bitcoin ABC will include support for cashaddr, hidden
> behind a configuration at first, so people can experiment with it. I would
> like to invite via this message various participants in the ecosystem to do
> the same.
>
> Let's do it ?
>
> Amaury Séchet
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-ml mailing listbitcoin-ml at lists.linuxfoundation.orghttps://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-ml
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-ml mailing list
> bitcoin-ml at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-ml
>
>

-- 
Matías Alejo Garcia
@ematiu
Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-ml/attachments/20171115/4e97e6c8/attachment-0001.html>