adding the commands for proof-of-reserves using the separate repository #48

ulrichard · 2021-10-18T08:10:57Z

adding the commands for proof-of-reserves using the separate repository

Notes to the reviewers

Checklists

All Submissions:

I've signed all my commits
I followed the contribution guidelines
I ran cargo fmt and cargo clippy before committing

New Features:

I've added tests for the new feature
I've added docs for the new feature
I've updated CHANGELOG.md

Bugfixes:

This pull request breaks the existing API
I've added tests to reproduce the issue which are now passing
I'm linking the issue being fixed by this PR

notmandatory · 2021-10-27T16:14:09Z

Rather than a merge commit (4fca4b8) it'd be better to rebased this branch on the latest master branch. Let me know if you need any help with the rebase.

notmandatory · 2021-10-27T16:18:46Z

Will the reserves feature only work right now with the electrum blockchain client? Or can it work with any blockchain that supports blockchain::Capability::GetAnyTx or some other capability?

ulrichard · 2021-10-28T05:42:50Z

Will the reserves feature only work right now with the electrum blockchain client? Or can it work with any blockchain that supports blockchain::Capability::GetAnyTx or some other capability?

So far I tested it only with electrum. I assume it could be made to work with others as well, but I didn't look into that so far.

ulrichard · 2021-11-10T09:55:47Z

I just updated the implementation to better separate between internal and external proof validation. The internal validation with a wallet (that can be built with a public key descriptor) can be used with any blockchain connector. It is only the external validation with addresses that is only available with electrum. The latter one is the more important one for me, and I'm ok with it only being available with electrum for now.
I tested and validated the behavior with the following script. It also serves as a good documentation
proof_of_reserves_roundtrip_blockfilters.sh.txt
Is there a standard way of integrating something like this in the documentation?

rajarshimaitra

untested Concept ACK. 3d192ec

Thanks for working on this, it can be a really useful feature. And I like the current external trait impl on bdk::wallet, that makes the reserves crate really portable without putting it into bdk crate directly. But this could be eventually added to the BDK project as a util library.

I will try to test the whole thing in more detail. I am wondering what is stopping us from using other blockchains like core RPC. From your test script it seems its working fine with compact filters. Will look and report back.

Below are few minor nits in mean time.

CHANGELOG.md

Cargo.toml

src/lib.rs

Cargo.toml

src/lib.rs

ulrichard · 2021-11-22T09:48:01Z

Yes, the plan for bdk-reserves was from the beginning to add it to the BDK project as a util library.

rajarshimaitra

initial tACK 3cc81db. I haven't run the test scripts, syncing my testnet node now. But there should not be an issue. Will play some more with it and report back if I find something odd.

Below are few more comments.

CHANGELOG.md

src/lib.rs

rajarshimaitra

reACK 4a91e63

Just few more small nits and I think its good to go.

Also I think the doc comments here

bdk-cli/src/lib.rs

Lines 192 to 242 in f8f65f2

 /// let expected_cli_opts = CliOpts { 

 /// network: Network::Testnet, 

 /// subcommand: CliSubCommand::Wallet { 

 /// wallet_opts: WalletOpts { 

 /// wallet: "main".to_string(), 

 /// verbose: false, 

 /// descriptor: "wpkh(tpubEBr4i6yk5nf5DAaJpsi9N2pPYBeJ7fZ5Z9rmN4977iYLCGco1VyjB9tvvuvYtfZzjD5A8igzgw3HeWeeKFmanHYqksqZXYXGsw5zjnj7KM9/44'/1'/0'/0/*)".to_string(), 

 /// change_descriptor: None, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "electrum")] 

 /// electrum_opts: ElectrumOpts { 

 /// timeout: None, 

 /// server: "ssl://electrum.blockstream.info:60002".to_string(), 

 /// stop_gap: 10 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-ureq")] 

 /// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts { 

 /// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(), 

 /// read_timeout: 5, 

 /// write_timeout: 5, 

 /// stop_gap: 10 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-reqwest")] 

 /// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts { 

 /// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(), 

 /// conc: 4, 

 /// stop_gap: 10 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "rpc")] 

 /// rpc_opts: RpcOpts{ 

 /// address: "127.0.0.1:18443".to_string(), 

 /// auth: ("user".to_string(), "password".to_string()), 

 /// skip_blocks: None, 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "compact_filters")] 

 /// compactfilter_opts: CompactFilterOpts{ 

 /// address: vec!["127.0.0.1:18444".to_string()], 

 /// conn_count: 4, 

 /// skip_blocks: 0, 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(any(feature="compact_filters", feature="electrum", feature="esplora"))] 

 /// proxy_opts: ProxyOpts{ 

 /// proxy: None, 

 /// proxy_auth: None, 

 /// retries: 5, 

 /// }, 

 /// }, 

 /// subcommand: WalletSubCommand::OnlineWalletSubCommand(Sync { 

 /// max_addresses: Some(50) 

 /// }), 

 /// }, 

 /// };

and here

bdk-cli/src/lib.rs

Lines 362 to 403 in f8f65f2

 /// let expected_wallet_opts = WalletOpts { 

 /// wallet: "main".to_string(), 

 /// verbose: false, 

 /// descriptor: "wpkh(tpubEBr4i6yk5nf5DAaJpsi9N2pPYBeJ7fZ5Z9rmN4977iYLCGco1VyjB9tvvuvYtfZzjD5A8igzgw3HeWeeKFmanHYqksqZXYXGsw5zjnj7KM9/44'/1'/0'/0/*)".to_string(), 

 /// change_descriptor: None, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "electrum")] 

 /// electrum_opts: ElectrumOpts { 

 /// timeout: None, 

 /// server: "ssl://electrum.blockstream.info:60002".to_string(), 

 /// stop_gap: 10 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-ureq")] 

 /// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts { 

 /// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(), 

 /// read_timeout: 5, 

 /// write_timeout: 5, 

 /// stop_gap: 10 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-reqwest")] 

 /// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts { 

 /// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(), 

 /// conc: 4, 

 /// stop_gap: 10 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "compact_filters")] 

 /// compactfilter_opts: CompactFilterOpts{ 

 /// address: vec!["127.0.0.1:18444".to_string()], 

 /// conn_count: 4, 

 /// skip_blocks: 0, 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(feature = "rpc")] 

 /// rpc_opts: RpcOpts{ 

 /// address: "127.0.0.1:18443".to_string(), 

 /// auth: ("user".to_string(), "password".to_string()), 

 /// skip_blocks: None, 

 /// }, 

 /// #[cfg(any(feature="compact_filters", feature="electrum", feature="esplora"))] 

 /// proxy_opts: ProxyOpts{ 

 /// proxy: None, 

 /// proxy_auth: None, 

 /// retries: 5, 

 /// },

needs to be updated to include the new flags and subcommands..

src/lib.rs

ulrichard · 2021-11-24T08:23:09Z

reACK 4a91e63

Just few more small nits and I think its good to go.

Also I think the doc comments here

bdk-cli/src/lib.rs

Lines 192 to 242 in f8f65f2

/// let expected_cli_opts = CliOpts {

/// network: Network::Testnet,

/// subcommand: CliSubCommand::Wallet {

/// wallet_opts: WalletOpts {

/// wallet: "main".to_string(),

/// verbose: false,

/// descriptor: "wpkh(tpubEBr4i6yk5nf5DAaJpsi9N2pPYBeJ7fZ5Z9rmN4977iYLCGco1VyjB9tvvuvYtfZzjD5A8igzgw3HeWeeKFmanHYqksqZXYXGsw5zjnj7KM9/44'/1'/0'/0/*)".to_string(),

/// change_descriptor: None,

/// #[cfg(feature = "electrum")]

/// electrum_opts: ElectrumOpts {

/// timeout: None,

/// server: "ssl://electrum.blockstream.info:60002".to_string(),

/// stop_gap: 10

/// },

/// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-ureq")]

/// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts {

/// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(),

/// read_timeout: 5,

/// write_timeout: 5,

/// stop_gap: 10

/// },

/// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-reqwest")]

/// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts {

/// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(),

/// conc: 4,

/// stop_gap: 10

/// },

/// #[cfg(feature = "rpc")]

/// rpc_opts: RpcOpts{

/// address: "127.0.0.1:18443".to_string(),

/// auth: ("user".to_string(), "password".to_string()),

/// skip_blocks: None,

/// },

/// #[cfg(feature = "compact_filters")]

/// compactfilter_opts: CompactFilterOpts{

/// address: vec!["127.0.0.1:18444".to_string()],

/// conn_count: 4,

/// skip_blocks: 0,

/// },

/// #[cfg(any(feature="compact_filters", feature="electrum", feature="esplora"))]

/// proxy_opts: ProxyOpts{

/// proxy: None,

/// proxy_auth: None,

/// retries: 5,

/// },

/// },

/// subcommand: WalletSubCommand::OnlineWalletSubCommand(Sync {

/// max_addresses: Some(50)

/// }),

/// },

/// };

and here

bdk-cli/src/lib.rs

Lines 362 to 403 in f8f65f2

/// let expected_wallet_opts = WalletOpts {

/// wallet: "main".to_string(),

/// verbose: false,

/// descriptor: "wpkh(tpubEBr4i6yk5nf5DAaJpsi9N2pPYBeJ7fZ5Z9rmN4977iYLCGco1VyjB9tvvuvYtfZzjD5A8igzgw3HeWeeKFmanHYqksqZXYXGsw5zjnj7KM9/44'/1'/0'/0/*)".to_string(),

/// change_descriptor: None,

/// #[cfg(feature = "electrum")]

/// electrum_opts: ElectrumOpts {

/// timeout: None,

/// server: "ssl://electrum.blockstream.info:60002".to_string(),

/// stop_gap: 10

/// },

/// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-ureq")]

/// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts {

/// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(),

/// read_timeout: 5,

/// write_timeout: 5,

/// stop_gap: 10

/// },

/// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-reqwest")]

/// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts {

/// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(),

/// conc: 4,

/// stop_gap: 10

/// },

/// #[cfg(feature = "compact_filters")]

/// compactfilter_opts: CompactFilterOpts{

/// address: vec!["127.0.0.1:18444".to_string()],

/// conn_count: 4,

/// skip_blocks: 0,

/// },

/// #[cfg(feature = "rpc")]

/// rpc_opts: RpcOpts{

/// address: "127.0.0.1:18443".to_string(),

/// auth: ("user".to_string(), "password".to_string()),

/// skip_blocks: None,

/// },

/// #[cfg(any(feature="compact_filters", feature="electrum", feature="esplora"))]

/// proxy_opts: ProxyOpts{

/// proxy: None,

/// proxy_auth: None,

/// retries: 5,

/// },

needs to be updated to include the new flags and subcommands..

I don't see how the new sub commands would fit in these examples. They only list the wallet options. But reserves didn't add anything there. It only adds sub-commands.

rajarshimaitra

tACK 4556d8e

I don't see how the new sub commands would fit in these examples. They only list the wallet options. But reserves didn't add anything there. It only adds sub-commands.

Ah right, my bad.. This has nothing to do with wallet opts..

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T02:03:24Z

I just updated the implementation to better separate between internal and external proof validation. The internal validation with a wallet (that can be built with a public key descriptor) can be used with any blockchain connector. It is only the external validation with addresses that is only available with electrum. The latter one is the more important one for me, and I'm ok with it only being available with electrum for now. I tested and validated the behavior with the following script. It also serves as a good documentation proof_of_reserves_roundtrip_blockfilters.sh.txt Is there a standard way of integrating something like this in the documentation?

I think ultimately we can document this on the website docs in a chapter on bdk-cli and sub-chapter on the reserves feature. For now if you'd like you can do a web site blog post to describe the new functionality and how to use it which we can convert to the more formal docs later.

notmandatory

Tested and looks good. I have a few small requests to make the cli more consistent.

Also I noticed that my proof of reserves validated even though one of the UTXOs wasn't confirmed on the (testnet) blockchain yet. Is this a known issue?

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T00:46:09Z

src/lib.rs

+ ProduceProof {
+ /// Sets the message
+ #[structopt(name = "MESSAGE", long = "message")]
+ msg: Option<String>,


From code looks like this is not an optional parameter so should be:

Suggested change

msg: Option<String>,

msg: String,

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T00:46:35Z

src/lib.rs

+ VerifyProof {
+ /// Sets the PSBT to verify
+ #[structopt(name = "BASE64_PSBT", long = "psbt")]
+ psbt: Option<String>,


Same as above not optional:

Suggested change

psbt: Option<String>,

psbt: String,

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T00:46:52Z

src/lib.rs

+ psbt: Option<String>,
+ /// Sets the message to verify
+ #[structopt(name = "MESSAGE", long = "message")]
+ msg: Option<String>,


Same as above not optional:

Suggested change

msg: Option<String>,

msg: String,

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T00:48:12Z

src/lib.rs

@@ -1076,6 +1134,47 @@ where
 let txid = maybe_await!(wallet.broadcast(tx))?;
 Ok(json!({ "txid": txid }))
 }
+ #[cfg(feature = "reserves")]
+ ProduceProof { msg } => {
+ let message = if let Some(msg) = msg {


If msg is not optional and is enforced by StructOpt then this logic isn't needed.

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T00:48:55Z

src/lib.rs

+ }
+ #[cfg(feature = "reserves")]
+ VerifyProof { psbt, msg } => {
+ let psbt = if let Some(psbt) = psbt {


If psbt is not optional and is enforced by StructOpt then this logic can be simplified.

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T00:49:14Z

src/lib.rs

+ } else {
+ panic!("Missing `psbt` option")
+ };
+ let message = if let Some(msg) = msg {


If msg is not optional and is enforced by StructOpt then this logic isn't needed.

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T02:08:52Z

You also will need to rebase on master to pickup CI testing against our new stable rust version (1.56.1).

ulrichard · 2021-12-01T08:31:46Z

Tested and looks good. I have a few small requests to make the cli more consistent.

Also I noticed that my proof of reserves validated even though one of the UTXOs wasn't confirmed on the (testnet) blockchain yet. Is this a known issue?

No, I was not aware of this.
And this could be easily exploited, but also easily detected.
I will add some checks and comments, also in the bdk-reserves lib.

ulrichard · 2021-12-01T15:04:12Z

src/lib.rs

+ let _max_confirmation_height = current_height - confirmations.unwrap_or(6);
+
+ // ToDO: use this line after upgrading to 0.14
+ //let spendable = maybe_await!(wallet.verify_proof(&psbt, &msg, max_confirmation_height))?;


after #60 is merged to master.

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T21:51:16Z

src/lib.rs

+ #[structopt(name = "MESSAGE", long = "message")]
+ msg: String,
+ /// Sets the number of block confirmations for UTXOs to be considered. If nothing is specified, 6 is used.
+ #[structopt(name = "CONFIRMATIONS", long = "confirmations")]


I think a better way to specify the default for the cli is like this, it will also show in the help so you don't need to mention it in the above docs line:

Suggested change

#[structopt(name = "CONFIRMATIONS", long = "confirmations")]

#[structopt(name = "CONFIRMATIONS", long = "confirmations", default_value = "6")]

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T21:52:02Z

src/lib.rs

+ msg: String,
+ /// Sets the number of block confirmations for UTXOs to be considered. If nothing is specified, 6 is used.
+ #[structopt(name = "CONFIRMATIONS", long = "confirmations")]
+ confirmations: Option<u32>,


If you specify the default_value via struct opt then you don't need an Option here:

Suggested change

confirmations: Option<u32>,

confirmations: u32,

notmandatory · 2021-12-01T21:53:36Z

src/lib.rs

+ let psbt = base64::decode(&psbt).unwrap();
+ let psbt: PartiallySignedTransaction = deserialize(&psbt).unwrap();
+ let current_height = wallet.client().get_height()?;
+ let _max_confirmation_height = current_height - confirmations.unwrap_or(6);


If default is specified via struct opt then this can be simplified a little and by moving to struct opt will always be in sync with cli docs:

Suggested change

let _max_confirmation_height = current_height - confirmations.unwrap_or(6);

let _max_confirmation_height = current_height - confirmations;

ulrichard · 2021-12-02T15:15:12Z

After adding the checks for block_height, many manual tests of the internal verify_proof() failed.
proof_of_reserves_roundtrip.sh.txt
But the tests in https://github.com/weareseba/bdk-reserves/blob/main/tests/mempool.rs always succeed on my machine.
Is is possible that the transaction information is not fully stored in the database?

src/lib.rs

notmandatory · 2021-12-07T03:32:53Z

ACK 7e6a4c8
I ran through some manual testing using electrum and this looks ready to merge.

I would like to eventually change the integration tests to use regtest instead of testnet so the tests will be a little quicker and not break if the utxos in the test descriptor changes, but I think it's fine for now.

ulrichard · 2021-12-07T09:53:34Z

Thanks for reviewing, testing and all the proposals for improvements @notmandatory and @rajarshimaitra
I can't merge it myself, as I am not authorized.

rajarshimaitra · 2021-12-07T12:30:00Z

@ulrichard Thanks for working on this. I will test the latest commits and merge it soon.

@notmandatory IIUC for regtest support we need this to work with RPC backend right?

notmandatory · 2021-12-07T16:51:47Z

@notmandatory IIUC for regtest support we need this to work with RPC backend right?

We can use the bitcoind and electrsd crates as we do in bdk to do automated regtest testing. But we haven't had any tests that needed them in this repo until the new test_proof_of_reserves_* tests were added.

rajarshimaitra

ReACK 7e6a4c8

@notmandatory yes that makes sense. Previously we didn't need such integrations tests here, but now that we need one, maybe it would make sense to also add some generic wallet tests with regtest rpc too along with PoR tests? We should be able to do all the stuffs in PoR except the ExternalReserves thing with RPC. I will open a new issue to keep track of it.

@ulrichard I am merging this now. Below is one future improvement question.

rajarshimaitra · 2021-12-08T07:00:35Z

Cargo.lock

+dependencies = [
+ "base64 0.11.0",
+ "bdk",
+ "bitcoinconsensus",


bdk has a verify feature that uses bitcoinconsensus. Would there a be a way in future to use bdk::verify instead of bitcoinconsensus in the bdk-reserves dependency?

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch from 4fca4b8 to c16595f Compare October 28, 2021 04:50

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch 2 times, most recently from d7063cc to 2ee0d40 Compare November 10, 2021 09:48

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch 2 times, most recently from 9e26917 to 3d192ec Compare November 10, 2021 10:26

rajarshimaitra suggested changes Nov 20, 2021

View reviewed changes

CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Cargo.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Cargo.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch from 3d192ec to 3cc81db Compare November 22, 2021 09:49

rajarshimaitra suggested changes Nov 22, 2021

View reviewed changes

CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch 2 times, most recently from d8a6064 to 4a91e63 Compare November 23, 2021 07:22

rajarshimaitra suggested changes Nov 23, 2021

View reviewed changes

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

rajarshimaitra suggested changes Nov 23, 2021

View reviewed changes

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch 3 times, most recently from 68722e2 to 4556d8e Compare November 24, 2021 14:29

rajarshimaitra approved these changes Nov 24, 2021

View reviewed changes

notmandatory requested changes Dec 1, 2021

View reviewed changes

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch 3 times, most recently from 4d67e95 to fb9ae70 Compare December 1, 2021 14:44

ulrichard commented Dec 1, 2021

View reviewed changes

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch 2 times, most recently from 109a44d to 09a9435 Compare December 1, 2021 15:41

notmandatory reviewed Dec 1, 2021

View reviewed changes

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch 4 times, most recently from d6a9564 to 75dde25 Compare December 2, 2021 07:42

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch from 75dde25 to 6f07303 Compare December 2, 2021 15:29

ulrichard commented Dec 2, 2021

View reviewed changes

src/lib.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch 3 times, most recently from d8ae6e6 to 1567bc1 Compare December 2, 2021 16:14

adding the commands for proof-of-reserves using the separate repository

7e6a4c8

ulrichard force-pushed the reserves-separate branch from 1567bc1 to 7e6a4c8 Compare December 3, 2021 06:23

notmandatory approved these changes Dec 7, 2021

View reviewed changes

rajarshimaitra approved these changes Dec 8, 2021

View reviewed changes

rajarshimaitra merged commit 58386a0 into bitcoindevkit:master Dec 8, 2021

notmandatory added this to the Release 0.4.0 Feature Freeze milestone Dec 8, 2021

ulrichard added a commit to bitcoindevkit/bdk-reserves that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2021

just for the CI of bitcoindevkit/bdk-cli#48

21fec32

notmandatory assigned ulrichard Mar 5, 2022

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

adding the commands for proof-of-reserves using the separate repository #48

adding the commands for proof-of-reserves using the separate repository #48

ulrichard commented Oct 18, 2021

notmandatory commented Oct 27, 2021

notmandatory commented Oct 27, 2021

ulrichard commented Oct 28, 2021

ulrichard commented Nov 10, 2021 •

edited

Loading

rajarshimaitra left a comment

ulrichard commented Nov 22, 2021

rajarshimaitra left a comment

rajarshimaitra left a comment •

edited

Loading

ulrichard commented Nov 24, 2021

rajarshimaitra left a comment •

edited

Loading

notmandatory commented Dec 1, 2021

notmandatory left a comment

notmandatory Dec 1, 2021

notmandatory Dec 1, 2021

notmandatory Dec 1, 2021

notmandatory Dec 1, 2021 •

edited

Loading

notmandatory Dec 1, 2021 •

edited

Loading

notmandatory Dec 1, 2021 •

edited

Loading

notmandatory commented Dec 1, 2021

ulrichard commented Dec 1, 2021

ulrichard Dec 1, 2021

notmandatory Dec 1, 2021

notmandatory Dec 1, 2021

notmandatory Dec 1, 2021 •

edited

Loading

ulrichard commented Dec 2, 2021

notmandatory commented Dec 7, 2021

ulrichard commented Dec 7, 2021

rajarshimaitra commented Dec 7, 2021

notmandatory commented Dec 7, 2021

rajarshimaitra left a comment •

edited

Loading

rajarshimaitra Dec 8, 2021

	/// let expected_cli_opts = CliOpts {
	/// network: Network::Testnet,
	/// subcommand: CliSubCommand::Wallet {
	/// wallet_opts: WalletOpts {
	/// wallet: "main".to_string(),
	/// verbose: false,
	/// descriptor: "wpkh(tpubEBr4i6yk5nf5DAaJpsi9N2pPYBeJ7fZ5Z9rmN4977iYLCGco1VyjB9tvvuvYtfZzjD5A8igzgw3HeWeeKFmanHYqksqZXYXGsw5zjnj7KM9/44'/1'/0'/0/*)".to_string(),
	/// change_descriptor: None,
	/// #[cfg(feature = "electrum")]
	/// electrum_opts: ElectrumOpts {
	/// timeout: None,
	/// server: "ssl://electrum.blockstream.info:60002".to_string(),
	/// stop_gap: 10
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-ureq")]
	/// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts {
	/// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(),
	/// read_timeout: 5,
	/// write_timeout: 5,
	/// stop_gap: 10
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-reqwest")]
	/// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts {
	/// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(),
	/// conc: 4,
	/// stop_gap: 10
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(feature = "rpc")]
	/// rpc_opts: RpcOpts{
	/// address: "127.0.0.1:18443".to_string(),
	/// auth: ("user".to_string(), "password".to_string()),
	/// skip_blocks: None,
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(feature = "compact_filters")]
	/// compactfilter_opts: CompactFilterOpts{
	/// address: vec!["127.0.0.1:18444".to_string()],
	/// conn_count: 4,
	/// skip_blocks: 0,
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(any(feature="compact_filters", feature="electrum", feature="esplora"))]
	/// proxy_opts: ProxyOpts{
	/// proxy: None,
	/// proxy_auth: None,
	/// retries: 5,
	/// },
	/// },
	/// subcommand: WalletSubCommand::OnlineWalletSubCommand(Sync {
	/// max_addresses: Some(50)
	/// }),
	/// },
	/// };

	/// let expected_wallet_opts = WalletOpts {
	/// wallet: "main".to_string(),
	/// verbose: false,
	/// descriptor: "wpkh(tpubEBr4i6yk5nf5DAaJpsi9N2pPYBeJ7fZ5Z9rmN4977iYLCGco1VyjB9tvvuvYtfZzjD5A8igzgw3HeWeeKFmanHYqksqZXYXGsw5zjnj7KM9/44'/1'/0'/0/*)".to_string(),
	/// change_descriptor: None,
	/// #[cfg(feature = "electrum")]
	/// electrum_opts: ElectrumOpts {
	/// timeout: None,
	/// server: "ssl://electrum.blockstream.info:60002".to_string(),
	/// stop_gap: 10
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-ureq")]
	/// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts {
	/// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(),
	/// read_timeout: 5,
	/// write_timeout: 5,
	/// stop_gap: 10
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(feature = "esplora-reqwest")]
	/// esplora_opts: EsploraOpts {
	/// server: "https://blockstream.info/testnet/api/".to_string(),
	/// conc: 4,
	/// stop_gap: 10
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(feature = "compact_filters")]
	/// compactfilter_opts: CompactFilterOpts{
	/// address: vec!["127.0.0.1:18444".to_string()],
	/// conn_count: 4,
	/// skip_blocks: 0,
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(feature = "rpc")]
	/// rpc_opts: RpcOpts{
	/// address: "127.0.0.1:18443".to_string(),
	/// auth: ("user".to_string(), "password".to_string()),
	/// skip_blocks: None,
	/// },
	/// #[cfg(any(feature="compact_filters", feature="electrum", feature="esplora"))]
	/// proxy_opts: ProxyOpts{
	/// proxy: None,
	/// proxy_auth: None,
	/// retries: 5,
	/// },

	#[structopt(name = "CONFIRMATIONS", long = "confirmations")]
	#[structopt(name = "CONFIRMATIONS", long = "confirmations", default_value = "6")]

	let _max_confirmation_height = current_height - confirmations.unwrap_or(6);
	let _max_confirmation_height = current_height - confirmations;

adding the commands for proof-of-reserves using the separate repository #48

adding the commands for proof-of-reserves using the separate repository #48

Conversation

ulrichard commented Oct 18, 2021