I've been reading a lot of docs on BTC transaction structure, and find it really confusing when it comes to SegWit story.
So, the very first thing is, if I've P2SH-P2WPKH address, does it mean that all outputs to this address (UTXOs) are by definition segwit UTXOs ?
In the docs (https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_wallet_dev/) it says:
Signature Generation and Verification for P2SH-P2WPKH
For spending of non-segwit UTXO, the signature generation algorithm is unchanged.
For spending of P2SH-P2WPKH:
- The scriptSig MUST ONLY contain a push of the redeemScript
...
So, either all UTXOs for P2SH-P2WPKH address are segwit ones, or they are SegWit if SegWit transaction was made to this address (which does little sense actually for me, as then arises chicken-egg problem).
Why they wrote this "For spending of non-segwit UTXO, the signature generation algorithm is unchanged" part, what case it covers? If you've P2SH-P2WPKH address but you are taking some foreign UTXOs to spend(that were directed not to your address)?
Another not clear part are scripts for P2SH-P2WPKH address. So here is my example address: 3MxYPuvEcKDdaEG1xoGyddqir6C4b66MJi
And here is transaction that was made to it: https://blockchain.info/rawtx/6c2806587d5cdb3f0363e43f60b4a84baf37b3012fbde02f108f4eb1bdcede42
Based on it pubKeyScript of output is a914de523116b281c96ff1e204ea2ff435b75d48f0de87 which translates to:
OP_HASH160 de523116b281c96ff1e204ea2ff435b75d48f0de OP_EQUAL
So, de523116b281c96ff1e204ea2ff435b75d48f0de is hash160 of redeem script. The only redeem script that matches this hash I've found is following:
0 389f26d8d616cb96df1cfd6d9989248a30b933b9
Which is witness v0 program script(0 sha160sha256(pubkey), so it means I've to create SegWit transactions, right? I tried making P2SH ones and it says that I've non-nominal pushes in the redeem script, that's cause of "0" push there I believe.
I feel that doing something wrong in this part, and as a result signing either wrong thing or in a wrong way...
Very appreciate any explanations.
