BIP 360 - Pay to Merkle Root (P2MR) by cryptoquick · Pull Request #1670 · bitcoin/bips

cryptoquick · 2024-09-27T16:08:30Z

This spent several months gathering feedback from the mailing list and from other advisors. This is hopefully polished enough to submit upstream.

Let me know if you have any questions or feedback, and of course feel free to submit suggestions.

Thank you for your time.

… to bitcoin/bips

jonatack

Interesting (the question of resistance to quantum computing may have resurged lately with the publication of https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8329, see also https://x.com/n1ckler/status/1839215426091249778).

jonatack · 2024-10-01T18:09:31Z

@cryptoquick Can you begin to write up the sections currently marked as TBD, along with a backwards compatibility section (to describe incompatibilities, severity, and suggest mitigations, where applicable/relevant)? We've begun to reserve a range of BIP numbers for this topic, pending continued progress here.

typo fix

jonatack · 2024-10-21T15:27:42Z

@cryptoquick ping for an update here. Have you seen https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/p8xz08YTvkw / https://github.com/chucrut/bips/blob/master/bip-xxxx.md? It may be interesting to review each other and possibly collaborate.

EthanHeilman · 2026-02-10T17:30:52Z

I would recommend merging as Draft and advancing to Complete in a few weeks if the reviews prompted by publication don’t turn up any further changes or those changes have been addressed.

@murchandamus Sounds good, reverted to draft.

murchandamus · 2026-02-10T21:16:48Z

Was just taking another look at this. I noticed two things:

The reference implementation seems to still be following the old terminology. The reference implementation is only required for moving a BIP to Complete, so it doesn’t have to be fixed before it is published. Is it acceptable for you to make any fixups that may arise to the reference implementation in a follow-up PR?
The commit history is a bit chaotic, and seems to contain the entire reference implementation history. We usually squash the commits of new BIPs to a single commit when it is published. Would that be an issue for you?

cryptoquick · 2026-02-10T21:18:51Z

Totally fine. Please give us a few days to create a new pull request.
That shouldn't be a problem. Squash away!

Thank you.

bitcoin#1670 (comment)

cryptoquick · 2026-02-11T19:15:13Z

@murchandamus We got the test vectors updates knocked out sooner than I thought, would you prefer we hold off on merging as originally planned or should we just get them into this one? See:
cryptoquick#42

murchandamus · 2026-02-11T20:02:29Z

If you have it ready, just merge it in here. I’ll wait with the publication until you tell me that it’s ready from your side.

* P2TSH: Taptree can now be populated with a mix of leaves secured either via Schnorr based locking script or SLH-DSA based locking script * P2TSH: Improved docs and variable names * p2tsh: even more improvements to docs for Rust implementation * p2tsh rust: now using libbitcoinpqc bindings package (segregated from core C implementation) * bip360: p2tsh -> p2mr * BIP360: Test that P2TR uses only witness version 1 bitcoin#1670 (comment)

cryptoquick · 2026-02-11T20:04:12Z

It is done.

--------- Co-authored-by: Ethan Heilman <ethan.r.heilman@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Isabel Foxen Duke <isabelfoxenduke@users.noreply.github.com> Review comments and assistance by: Armin Sabouri <armins88@gmail.com> D++ <82842780+dplusplus1024@users.noreply.github.com> Jameson Lopp <jameson.lopp@gmail.com> jbride <jbride2001@yahoo.com> Joey Yandle <xoloki@gmail.com> Jon Atack <jon@atack.com> Jonas Nick <jonasd.nick@gmail.com> Kyle Crews <kylecrews@Kyles-Mac-Studio.local> Mark "Murch" Erhardt <murch@murch.one> notmike-5 <notmike-5@users.noreply.github.com> Vojtěch Strnad <43024885+vostrnad@users.noreply.github.com>

Review comments and assistance by: Armin Sabouri <armins88@gmail.com> D++ <82842780+dplusplus1024@users.noreply.github.com> Jameson Lopp <jameson.lopp@gmail.com> jbride <jbride2001@yahoo.com> Joey Yandle <xoloki@gmail.com> Jon Atack <jon@atack.com> Jonas Nick <jonasd.nick@gmail.com> Kyle Crews <kylecrews@Kyles-Mac-Studio.local> Mark "Murch" Erhardt <murch@murch.one> notmike-5 <notmike-5@users.noreply.github.com> Vojtěch Strnad <43024885+vostrnad@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ethan Heilman <ethan.r.heilman@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Isabel Foxen Duke <110147802+Isabelfoxenduke@users.noreply.github.com>

mohanson · 2026-03-27T07:23:12Z

@cryptoquick The link in that sentence in the document is broken.

Test vector data for creation of P2MR UTXOs can be found here.

SomberNight · 2026-04-07T23:59:08Z

+
+These test vectors build off of the test vectors for [[bip-0341.mediawiki|BIP 341]] (Taproot). One important distinction is that the P2MR test vectors do not include keypath spend scenarios.
+
+Also included are test vectors in [https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/tree/master/bip-0360/ref-impl/rust rust implementation] and [https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/tree/master/bip-0360/ref-impl/python python implementation]. One of these tests demonstrates a tapscript that requires a secp256k1 signature to spend the P2MR UTXO (modeled after one of the extremely valuable examples provided by [https://learnmeabitcoin.com/technical/upgrades/taproot/#example-3-script-path-spend-signature this Taproot script path spend example]. Similar to BIP 341 test vectors, all signatures are created with an all-zero (0x0000...0000) [[bip-0340.mediawiki|BIP 340]] auxiliary randomness array.


looks like the mentioned python implementation either never materialised or was omitted from the PR

Good point

Just checked

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/tree/master/bip-0360/ref-impl/python

Will address in v2

@notmike-5 @jbride

Want me to remove the reference to python in the BIP 360 until we readd it?

Not sure why that's necessary

cryptoquick added 2 commits September 27, 2024 10:05

QuBit - P2QRH spending rules - Final draft before submitting upstream…

1fa2485

… to bitcoin/bips

Add pqNTRUsign to .typos.toml.

6f67a3d

cryptoquick marked this pull request as draft September 27, 2024 18:18

EthanHeilman reviewed Sep 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

Comment thread bip-p2qrh.mediawiki Outdated

EthanHeilman reviewed Sep 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

Comment thread bip-p2qrh.mediawiki Outdated

EthanHeilman reviewed Sep 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

Comment thread bip-p2qrh.mediawiki Outdated

jonatack added the New BIP label Sep 27, 2024

jonatack reviewed Sep 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

Comment thread bip-p2qrh.mediawiki Outdated

cryptoquick force-pushed the p2qrh branch 2 times, most recently from b6ed2c3 to d6d15ad Compare September 28, 2024 18:01

kingcathy23 approved these changes Sep 28, 2024

View reviewed changes

cryptoquick force-pushed the p2qrh branch 2 times, most recently from 0608cc1 to a595bf0 Compare September 28, 2024 18:12

cryptoquick requested review from EthanHeilman and jonatack September 28, 2024 18:55

cryptoquick force-pushed the p2qrh branch from a595bf0 to eae4707 Compare September 29, 2024 07:22

luisschwab mentioned this pull request Sep 29, 2024

Tópicos Out/24 ClubeBitcoinUnB/bitdevs.bsb.br#11

Closed

cryptoquick force-pushed the p2qrh branch 2 times, most recently from 19d4592 to 7f4456d Compare September 30, 2024 11:42

jonatack reviewed Sep 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

Comment thread bip-p2qrh.mediawiki Outdated

QuBit - P2QRH

d83c29d

cryptoquick force-pushed the p2qrh branch from 7f4456d to d83c29d Compare October 1, 2024 01:03

jlopp and others added 2 commits October 2, 2024 10:30

typo fix

ae0936a

Merge pull request #13 from jlopp/patch-3

d89b7c5

typo fix

jonatack added the PR Author action required Needs updates, has unaddressed review comments, or is otherwise waiting for PR author label Oct 9, 2024

luisschwab mentioned this pull request Oct 14, 2024

Novembro 2024 saopaulobitdevs/saopaulobitdevs.org#38

Closed

QuBit - P2QRH spending rules

b4c329b

cryptoquick force-pushed the p2qrh branch from a3af198 to b4c329b Compare October 21, 2024 17:39

EthanHeilman force-pushed the p2qrh branch 3 times, most recently from df0feef to f5aa4d9 Compare February 10, 2026 17:29

EthanHeilman force-pushed the p2qrh branch from f5aa4d9 to 90b90a2 Compare February 10, 2026 17:33

Rename P2TSH to P2MR

2a041bf

EthanHeilman force-pushed the p2qrh branch from 90b90a2 to 2a041bf Compare February 10, 2026 17:37

cryptoquick changed the title ~~BIP 360 - Pay to Tapscript Hash (P2TSH)~~ BIP 360 - Pay to Merkle Root (P2MR) Feb 10, 2026

murchandamus removed the PR Author action required Needs updates, has unaddressed review comments, or is otherwise waiting for PR author label Feb 10, 2026

deadmanoz mentioned this pull request Feb 11, 2026

March 2026 Perth BitDevs PerthBitDevs/PerthBitDevs#32

Open

jbride added a commit to jbride/bips that referenced this pull request Feb 11, 2026

BIP360: Test that P2TR uses only witness version 1

5380b29

bitcoin#1670 (comment)

murchandamus merged commit a314861 into bitcoin:master Feb 11, 2026
4 checks passed

johnny9 mentioned this pull request Feb 12, 2026

Socratic Seminar 50 TriangleBitDevs/TriangleBitDevs.github.io#50

Closed

jasonandjay mentioned this pull request Feb 15, 2026

Feature Request: Add P2MR (Pay-to-Merkle-Root) support (BIP 360) bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib#2311

Open

diogo-ck mentioned this pull request Feb 18, 2026

Tópicos 2026 02 curitibabitdevs/curitibabitdevs.org#38

Closed

murchandamus mentioned this pull request Mar 24, 2026

BIP440: Varops Budget for Script Runtime Constraint, BIP441: Restoration of disabled Script (tapleaf 0xc2) #2118

Merged

mohanson mentioned this pull request Mar 25, 2026

Implement P2MR(Pay-to-Merkle-Root) address format libraries/pabtc#16

Closed

Iskander-Agent mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2026

Bounty: Bitcoin Quantum Upgrade — Developer Power Map & Sentiment Analysis 1btc-news/news-client#30

Open

Sober-Osprey mentioned this pull request Apr 5, 2026

Bounty: Satoshi Stash Quantum Monitor (new aibtc.news beat) 1btc-news/news-client#28

Open

SomberNight reviewed Apr 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

ThankNIXlater mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2026

Editor payout automation: Zen Rocket (quantum beat) aibtcdev/agent-news#438

Closed

16 tasks


		These test vectors build off of the test vectors for [[bip-0341.mediawiki\|BIP 341]] (Taproot). One important distinction is that the P2MR test vectors do not include keypath spend scenarios.

		Also included are test vectors in [https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/tree/master/bip-0360/ref-impl/rust rust implementation] and [https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/tree/master/bip-0360/ref-impl/python python implementation]. One of these tests demonstrates a tapscript that requires a secp256k1 signature to spend the P2MR UTXO (modeled after one of the extremely valuable examples provided by [https://learnmeabitcoin.com/technical/upgrades/taproot/#example-3-script-path-spend-signature this Taproot script path spend example]. Similar to BIP 341 test vectors, all signatures are created with an all-zero (0x0000...0000) [[bip-0340.mediawiki\|BIP 340]] auxiliary randomness array.

Conversation

cryptoquick commented Sep 27, 2024

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jonatack left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jonatack commented Oct 1, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jonatack commented Oct 21, 2024

Uh oh!

EthanHeilman commented Feb 10, 2026

Uh oh!

murchandamus commented Feb 10, 2026

Uh oh!

cryptoquick commented Feb 10, 2026

Uh oh!

cryptoquick commented Feb 11, 2026

Uh oh!

murchandamus commented Feb 11, 2026

Uh oh!

cryptoquick commented Feb 11, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mohanson commented Mar 27, 2026

Uh oh!

SomberNight Apr 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cryptoquick Apr 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

EthanHeilman Apr 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cryptoquick Apr 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

20 participants

jonatack left a comment •

edited

Loading

jonatack commented Oct 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading