|
Title: Double check my relative locktime script Post by: luv2drnkbr on July 19, 2016, 09:02:52 PM I just want to make sure I am writing the script correctly, and was hoping somebody could point out my errors or let me know it's correct. I have 2 keys, and I want to require both keys' signatures or wait 2 weeks after inclusion in a block and require 1 signature.
The keys are: Code: 020dd847d245216d27fad46c99ea490b8b9dbae87e144fc1f0c9427b041e4acf90 My understanding of the RLT BIP is that 2 weeks would translate to 0x40093a. So the script I came up with is: Code: OP_IF which I believe translates into the redeem script hex of: Code: 634e3a094000b2755167526821020dd847d245216d27fad46c99ea490b8b9dbae87e144fc1f0c9427b041e4acf90210346cbb9b74d786560a7e69a1013ddb6af6931d939f9dbba8311aab55de4fb772f52ae for the address 3B6X5FyVdm3qS8J2CNbX2n8M2JyzXhQw8L. Alternatively, I changed the relative locktime to be 2016 blocks instead of two weeks, for a redeem script of: Code: 634de007b2755167526821020dd847d245216d27fad46c99ea490b8b9dbae87e144fc1f0c9427b041e4acf90210346cbb9b74d786560a7e69a1013ddb6af6931d939f9dbba8311aab55de4fb772f52ae and the address 3DDPMrpPeL81WEb4u8cVgRAGZyGanVCVVp. Are those redeem scripts correct? And to spend from them, I would need to set the sequence of the input to match what's in the redeem script (but filled to all 4 bytes in the case of the 2016 block example).. is that correct? And the scriptsig would look like this: Code: 0 sig 1 or alternatively Code: 0 sig1 sig2 0 Do I have everything correct? Please don't send money for me to test. (Not that anybody was going to.) Those keys are NOT the actual keys involved! I made them up for the purposes of posting here. Thanks for the help! Edit: Random thought... Could I remove the OP_DROP and the 1 from the OP_IF and use the OP_TRUE stack item produced by OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY as the OP_1 for the multisig m-keys-required? Title: Re: Double check my relative locktime script Post by: achow101 on July 19, 2016, 11:08:41 PM My understanding of the RLT BIP is that 2 weeks would translate to 0x40093a. So the script I came up with is: No. It has to be in Little Endian, so swap the bytes. It should be 0x3a0940.Edit: Random thought... Could I remove the OP_DROP and the 1 from the OP_IF and use the OP_TRUE stack item produced by OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY as the OP_1 for the multisig m-keys-required? No you cannot remove them. OP_CSV does not return an OP_TRUE, it acts as either a OP_NOP or it terminates the script execution with an error. If it passes, then nothing happens and it needs to be removed from the stack with OP_DROP. If it fails, then the transaction fails and is rejected.Edit: Figured it out. Besides for the endianness, it all looks good. Title: Re: Double check my relative locktime script Post by: amaclin on July 20, 2016, 06:55:09 PM ...which I believe translates into the redeem script hex of: 63 = OP_IF, correct634e... 4E = OP_PUSHDATA4 - WTF?? Alternatively, I changed the relative locktime to be 2016 blocks instead of two weeks, for a redeem script of: 63 = OP_IF, correct634d... 4D = OP_PUSHDATA2 - WTF?? Title: Re: Double check my relative locktime script Post by: luv2drnkbr on July 20, 2016, 07:23:58 PM ...which I believe translates into the redeem script hex of: 63 = OP_IF, correct634e... 4E = OP_PUSHDATA4 - WTF?? Alternatively, I changed the relative locktime to be 2016 blocks instead of two weeks, for a redeem script of: 63 = OP_IF, correct634d... 4D = OP_PUSHDATA2 - WTF?? Edit 2: Nevermind, I'm an idiot. See posts below. No. It has to be in Little Endian, so swap the bytes. It should be 0x3a0940. Right. I didn't write it in the script example, but I did do that in the redeem script. Thanks for looking out though. No you cannot remove them. OP_CSV does not return an OP_TRUE, it acts as either a OP_NOP or it terminates the script execution with an error. If it passes, then nothing happens and it needs to be removed from the stack with OP_DROP. If it fails, then the transaction fails and is rejected. Yes, you're absolutely right. That was just a brain fart on my end. Thanks again. Title: Re: Double check my relative locktime script Post by: amaclin on July 20, 2016, 07:33:07 PM Yeah, how else am I pushing the sequence number I want to compare for OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY? int32 should be pushed as an array of 3 or 4 bytes (or even 5?) in lo-endianso, the second byte in your redeem script will be 03 or 04, but not greater than 05 Title: Re: Double check my relative locktime script Post by: luv2drnkbr on July 20, 2016, 07:43:18 PM Yeah, how else am I pushing the sequence number I want to compare for OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY? int32 should be pushed as an array of 3 or 4 bytes (or even 5?) in lo-endianso, the second byte in your redeem script will be 03 or 04, but not greater than 05 Yeah I just realized the fuckup and was coming to edit my post. Pushdata bytes are the number of bytes to push, not the data itself. I know that. That was just another brain fart. How do these scripts look? Code: 63033a0940b2755167526821020dd847d245216d27fad46c99ea490b8b9dbae87e144fc1f0c9427b041e4acf90210346cbb9b74d786560a7e69a1013ddb6af6931d939f9dbba8311aab55de4fb772f52ae Code: 6302e007b2755167526821020dd847d245216d27fad46c99ea490b8b9dbae87e144fc1f0c9427b041e4acf90210346cbb9b74d786560a7e69a1013ddb6af6931d939f9dbba8311aab55de4fb772f52ae Title: Re: Double check my relative locktime script Post by: amaclin on July 20, 2016, 07:48:59 PM How do these scripts look? much better.try to use them on testnet. Title: Re: Double check my relative locktime script Post by: luv2drnkbr on July 20, 2016, 08:48:57 PM Awesome. Thank you.
Nevermind, I found the answer. Yes, they are activated! |