From f1d6702c6c5a43a6f6786d312cfb318cfef42de1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Greg Tonoski <111286121+GregTonoski@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 13:50:50 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Addition of 3 comments

---
 Comments:BIP-0039.md | 9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Comments:BIP-0039.md b/Comments:BIP-0039.md
index 5b523ba..37bf18f 100644
--- a/Comments:BIP-0039.md
+++ b/Comments:BIP-0039.md
@@ -21,3 +21,12 @@ BIP39 requires a minimum 128-bits of entropy. Some people are suggesting this me
 
 The lack of versioning is a serious design flaw in this proposal. On this basis alone I would recommend against use of this proposal.  The general design is a thinly disguised brainwallet. Experience with user behavior shows that the user of user passphrases is more or less unconditionally unsafe and yet very attractive to users. If this proposal is implemented it should not be implemented without the checksum enforced. Without it this proposal is an attractive nuisance which has directly caused funds loss.-- Greg Maxwell 2017-03-14
 
+# Alternative binary-to-word encodings 
+
+There are alternative binary-to-word encodings, e.g. PGP word list (a.k.a biometric Word List), EEF Word Lists (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/07/new-wordlists-random-passphrases), RFC-1760 2048 words (a.k.a. S/KEY 6-Words ). There aren't adventages and disadvantages of BIP-39 in comparison to the alternatives described. --Greg Tonoski, 2023-09-13
+
+# Inflexibility: entropy of 128, 160, 192, 224, 256 bit length limit is imposed instead of accepting any length (between 128-256).
+--Greg Tonoski, 2023-09-13
+
+# Complexity: SHA-256 calculation may be avoided and separated
+Are there any benefits of SHA-256-derived checksum requirement? User ends up in the same situation if they input incorrect words - irrespectively of the checksum appended. Typing errors are not prevented. --Greg Tonoski, 2023-09-13
\ No newline at end of file