fixup: edits for feedback, round 1

Author: harding

_posts/en/newsletters/2019-03-26-newsletter.md

@@ -23,8 +23,8 @@ code changes in popular Bitcoin infrastructure projects.
 
 ## News
 
-- **Version 2 P2P transport proposal:** Jonas Schnelli sent a proposed
-  BIP to the Bitcoin-Dev mailing list that specifies an algorithm to be
+- **Version 2 P2P transport proposal:** Jonas Schnelli sent a [proposed
+  BIP][v2 transport] to the Bitcoin-Dev mailing list that specifies an algorithm to be
   used to encrypt traffic between peers.  It also specifies some other
   minor changes to the creation of protocol messages, such as allowing
   peers to use bandwidth-saving short identifiers and eliminating the
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ code changes in popular Bitcoin infrastructure projects.
     will receive no compensation for the onchain transaction fees
     required for both of those transactions.  According to the [Loop
     documentation][], their implementation has Alice send Bob a small
-    trusted payment in advance of the trustless exchange as an act of
+    trusted payment via LN in advance of the trustless exchange as an act of
     good faith and an assurance that the operation won't end up costing
     Bob money.
 
@@ -92,29 +92,35 @@ by failing to support it soon.
 Optech tracks statistics about segwit use on our [dashboard][optech
 dashboard]; another site tracking related statistics is [P2SH.info][].
 We see an average of about 200 outputs per block are sent to native
-segwit addresses.  Those outputs are then spent in about 10% of all
-Bitcoin transactions.  That makes payments to native segwit addresses
+segwit addresses (bech32).  Those outputs are then spent in about 10% of all
+Bitcoin transactions.  That makes payments involving native segwit addresses
 more popular than almost all altcoins.
 
 ![Screenshot of Optech Dashboard segwit usage stats](/img/posts/2019-03-segwit-usage.png)
 
-However, wallets supporting segwit can also receive payment to
-backwards-compatible P2SH addresses.  We can't track that directly, but
-the statistics sites linked earlier do tell us how often users spend
-bitcoins they received to a compatibility address.  Currently, that
-averages at about 37% of transactions.  If adoption remained steady at
-that level, it would represent a minimum average of 1,400 outputs per
-block.  Likely, it's even higher now.
-
-Any wallet that supports compatibility addresses also likely supports
-native addresses, so the number of transactions made by wallets that
-want to take advantage of bech32 sending support is currently over
-45% and rising.
+However, many wallets want to use segwit but still need to deal with
+services that don't yet have bech32 sending support.  These wallets can
+generate a P2SH address that references their segwit details, which is
+less efficient than using bech32 but more efficient than not using
+segwit at all.  Because these are normal P2SH addresses, we can't tell
+just by looking at transaction outputs which P2SH addresses are
+something like regular P2SH multisig and which contain a nested segwit
+commitment, so we don't know the actual number of payments to
+nested-segwit addresses.  However, when one of these outputs is spent,
+the spender does reveal any segwit details, so the above statistics
+sites report that currently about 37% of transactions contain at least
+one spend from a nested-segwit output.  That corresponds to about 1,400
+outputs per block on average.
+
+Any wallet that supports P2SH nested segwit addresses also likely
+supports bech32 native addresses, so the number of transactions made by
+wallets that want to take advantage of bech32 sending support is
+currently over 45% and rising.
 
 To further gauge segwit popularity, you might also want to know which
 notable Bitcoin wallets and services support it.  For that, we recommend
 the community-maintained [bech32 adoption][] page on the Bitcoin Wiki or
-the [when segwit][] page maintained by BRD Wallet.
+the [when segwit][] page maintained by BRD wallet.
 
 The statistics and compatibility data show that segwit is already well
 supported and frequently used, but that there are a few notable holdouts
@@ -254,3 +260,4 @@ answers made since our last update.*
 [bech32 adoption]: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bech32_adoption
 [when segwit]: https://whensegwit.com/
 [taproot]: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2018-January/015614.html
+[v2 transport]: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2019-March/016806.html