Mention that BIP350 proposes to reduce the scope of BIP173 to Native Segwit v0 #1582

pull murchandamus wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from murchandamus:2024-04-reduce-bip173-to-v0 changing 1 files +10 −0

murchandamus commented at 5:42 PM on April 25, 2024: contributor

This is a follow-up to #945 to reduce the scope of BIP173 to native segwit v0.

I expect that you may have feedback about the phrasing, @sipa.
murchandamus marked this as a draft on Apr 25, 2024
sipa commented at 6:06 PM on April 25, 2024: member
I think it suffices to add:
- a comment about the discovered weakness in the checksum scheme
- a reference to BIP-350 saying "Because of (that weakness), BIP-350 proposes using the scheme described in this BIP only for Witness v0 outputs."
- A "Superseded-By: 350" header.
That avoids actually changing what BIP-173 proposed, even though we now know that wasn't ideal.
murchandamus force-pushed on Apr 25, 2024

in bip-0173.mediawiki:14 in 0f4c9e264b outdated

  10 | @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
  11 |    Created: 2017-03-20
  12 |    License: BSD-2-Clause
  13 |    Replaces: 142
  14 | +  Superseded-by: 350

sipa commented at 6:11 PM on April 25, 2024:

"by" -> "By"

Mention that BIP350 reduces scope of bech32 to v0 7a10449186
murchandamus force-pushed on Apr 25, 2024
murchandamus marked this as ready for review on Apr 25, 2024
sipa commented at 6:21 PM on April 25, 2024: member

ACK 7a104491862379e88662a39d1a2b613c907e503e
murchandamus merged this on Apr 25, 2024
murchandamus closed this on Apr 25, 2024
vostrnad commented at 6:26 PM on April 25, 2024: contributor

Looks like you accidentally deleted most of the changes during a force push?

Edit: Never mind, looks like it wasn't accidental, however I feel like the PR title should have been updated.
sipa commented at 6:34 PM on April 25, 2024: member

~~@vostrnad I objected offline about the title change and other changes.~~

BIP173, for better or worse, still refers to the idea of using Bech32 for all Native Witness outputs. It has been largely supplanted by BIP350, and it now makes note of that, but we shouldn't be retroactively changing what the idea of BIP173 was.

Nevermind, you're referring to the PR title, not the BIP title?
vostrnad commented at 6:45 PM on April 25, 2024: contributor

Yes, the PR title (and consequently the merge commit) still talks about changing the scope. Nothing serious, but I'd still prefer for future PRs to have just a little more time for outside review.
murchandamus renamed this:
~~Reduce scope of BIP173 to native segwit v0~~
Mention that BIP350 proposes to reduce the scope of BIP173 to Native Segwit v0
on Apr 25, 2024
Jhuckabee3131981 approved
murchandamus deleted the branch on Jul 11, 2024

Contributors

Linked (view graph)

#945 Limit the valid segwit address lengths.