On 21 February 2017 at 15:04, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 21 February 2017 at 14:50, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> > wrote: > >> On 02/21/2017 12:40 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >> > ecdsa-koblitz-pubkey >> > >> > It's not actually a public key, is it? >> > >> > It's the hashed public key with a network address, specific to the >> > bitcoin main net. >> > >> > What if there are other koblitz keys using a different network address, >> > e.g. testnet, alt coins etc. >> >> All good points, pulling in Harlan and Christopher (cc'd), who are >> working on the ECDSA Koblitz-based signatures. >> >> Thoughts, Harlan, Christopher? >> > > Thanks. For context, the example string was : > > ecdsa-koblitz-pubkey:1LGpGhGK8whX23ZNdxrgtjKrek9rP4xWER > > I suspect this is a kind of place holder for the prototype? > > IIRC this would not be a valid URI according to RFC 3986 [1] as you > normally have a second colon e.g. > > pubkey:ecdsa-koblitz-bitcoin:1LGpGhGK8whX23ZNdxrgtjKrek9rP4xWER > > (I may be wrong on that) > > In any case, great work! > > [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986 > Actually I think I was incorrect on that part. I am thinking of the URN spec, which requires an authority. > > > >> >> -- manu >> >> -- >> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) >> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. >> blog: Rebalancing How the Web is Built >> http://manu.sporny.org/2016/rebalancing/ >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2017 14:07:35 UTC