From 9413cc1f0783e3473ea1dba0b8241d6fbac4a384 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Pieter Wuille Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:12:55 -0700 Subject: Small fix: 0xc1 is possible as first control block byte --- bip-tapscript.mediawiki | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'bip-tapscript.mediawiki') diff --git a/bip-tapscript.mediawiki b/bip-tapscript.mediawiki index a31774f..a325573 100644 --- a/bip-tapscript.mediawiki +++ b/bip-tapscript.mediawiki @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ The rules below only apply when validating a transaction input for which all of * The transaction output is a '''segregated witness spend''' (i.e., the scriptPubKey is a witness program as defined in BIP141). * It is a '''taproot spend''' as defined in bip-taproot (i.e., the witness version is 1, the witness program is 32 bytes, and it is not P2SH wrapped). * It is a '''script path spend''' as defined in bip-taproot (i.e., after removing the optional annex from the witness stack, two or more stack elements remain). -* The leaf version is ''0xc0'' (i.e. the first byte of the last witness element after removing the optional annex is ''0xc0'')'''How is the ''0xc0'' constant chosen?''' Following the guidelines in bip-taproot, by choosing a value having the two top bits set, tapscript spends are identifiable even without access to the UTXO being spent., marking it as a '''tapscript spend'''. +* The leaf version is ''0xc0'' (i.e. the first byte of the last witness element after removing the optional annex is ''0xc0'' or ''0xc1'')'''How is the ''0xc0'' constant chosen?''' Following the guidelines in bip-taproot, by choosing a value having the two top bits set, tapscript spends are identifiable even without access to the UTXO being spent., marking it as a '''tapscript spend'''. Validation of such inputs must be equivalent to performing the following steps in the specified order. # If the input is invalid due to BIP16, BIP141, or bip-taproot, fail. -- cgit v1.2.3