W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-interledger@w3.org > December 2016

Re: Last Call for Comments on Crypto-Conditions

From: Stefan Thomas <stefan@ripple.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 02:34:17 +0000
Message-ID: <CAFpK0Q1F+9fxbt6vXAZre68uxYKeKUptsQRFgwms4iAdHfk=3Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@blockstream.com>
Cc: Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>, Steven Roose <stevenroose@gmail.com>, Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>
> I’d like to see an ECDSA-Koblitz signature (AKA secp256k1) supported, for
both Ethereum & Bitcoin.

And Ripple!

I'd be supportive of this. What are your/Blockstream's current thoughts
about ECDSA vs Schnorr? Last time we spoke it sounded like everyone agreed
that Schnorr was the future. Any reason to go with ECDSA other than the
fact that it is currently more widely used?

On that note - is there an I-D/RFC for secp256k1-schnorr? If not, we'd be
very interested in co-sponsoring and/or contributing to one.

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 5:28 AM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 14 December 2016 at 04:06, Christopher Allen <
> ChristopherA@blockstream.com> wrote:
>
> I’d like to see an ECDSA-Koblitz signature (AKA secp256k1) supported, for
> both Ethereum & Bitcoin.
>
>
> +1
>
>
>
> — Christopher Allen
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2016 02:35:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 21 December 2016 02:35:01 UTC