01:21:44 geonic: my contributions were primarily around cross-group DL stuff 01:22:03 I still have some ongoing questions about a few aspects of the construction 01:22:18 UkoeHB_: what would "upgrade" mean for that? 01:22:42 Funds addressed to existing multisig addresses need to be available 01:22:50 Otherwise you've effectively frozen funds 01:41:08 there won't be a problem with that; multisig doesn't need to be rolled out with a hard fork, so multisigv2 could coexist with software running multisigv1, but would be incompatible for multisig interactions 01:41:55 robust aggregation is only relevant for _creating_ new wallets, and commit-and-reveal is only relevant for creating new transactions (so in-progress transactions at time of update would be screwed up) 01:44:10 people using less-secure v1 multisig wallets would have to migrate to new wallets if they are concerned their partners are malicious 01:47:17 in other words, in multisigv2 you can use v1 wallets but can only create v2 wallets and v2 transactions 07:05:20 geonic: Hi, I said that MRL and particularly sarang helper me (before and during the work) not that we wrote the protocol together, sorry if my phrasing in the post was imprecise 07:10:11 and yes, I want more people to look at the paper 07:11:50 sarang: feel free to post your question here (or in private) whenever you want, I'm always around 07:39:49 I'm very happy to discuss about the protocol with everybody here obviously 13:14:35 h4sh3d[m]: I don't think you misrepresented anything 13:14:51 I was happy to provide help with the proof stuff 13:15:11 And I'm very glad the research turned out well! 13:16:23 I still am working through the implications of the communication between participants 13:21:22 Do you plan to post as an IACR preprint?