Bitcoin Forum

 .

The Namecoin developers are generally interested.

Note that domob rebased Namecoin to the current Bitcoin version: https://github.com/namecoin/namecore

Also note that I (somewhat on purpose) also kept / keep the auxpow-related stuff in a separate branch from Namecoin proper.  I. e., it is a branch of Bitcoin Core (up-to-date with almost the latest upstream commits) that only adds auxpow, including proper unit- and regression tests.  I think that this could definitely be useful to other coins.  For instance, I also spotted (and fixed) some issues (memory leaks, for instance) in the getauxblock code used by Dogecoin and probably others.

The three other traditional/ancient merged mined coins in the family are GRouPcoin (GRP), CoiLedCoin (CLC) and GeistGeld (XGG).

GeistGeld is still an interesting experiment, for example once I started trying to use Jupiter and Neptune mining rigs with p2pool I ran into a problem with GeistGeld blocks being found so fast that timeouts would occur then file handles would be exhausted.

With the Jupiter I found that if I gradually drove up the total hashing power that GeistGeld as a whole (across its whole network, not just on p2pool or my instance of p2pool) slowly to bring the difficulty up, the out of file handles errors would go away. I have not managed that yet since deploying Neptunes as I do not have enough electricity to allow me the luxury of running a few old Butterfly Labs rigs like I did in the Jupiter era. But I expect that once I get full power to my country-house I should be able to solve it the same way as before.

In theory one would imagine that setting the priority of pools sharing the mining power of a Neptune would let you gradually ramp up the amount hitting the p2pool, or the amount hitting a standalone GeistGeld, or whatever; but in practice not only does the Neptune's panel only offer priorities of 0 through 9 but also it is not even clear whether priority nine gets nine times as much hash power as priority one.

Basically the root of the problem seems to be not merely the speed of the blocks but also the dearth of miners. With very few miners running very few Neptunes, and before the Neptunes arrived only very few miners running very few Jupiters, each Neptune that starts mining it makes a big difference. The problem should thus go away once many miners using many Neptunes and the like have added it into their merge.

p2pool itself though seems to have problems dealing with Neptunes. When my first Neptune arrived I could only see one terahash from it, instead of the expected three point four terahashes, even qwhen only merging the slow-block coins. (That is, it was p2pool giving trouble not e.g. GeistGeld or other fast block coins in the merge.)

What other merged mining software is available as free open source, in particular, something fast enough to deal with Neptune mining rigs?

-MarkM-

Heya, Devcoiners are still interested.

Lastest official wallet: https://github.com/coinzen/devcoin

Huntercoin is also merge mined with Bitcoin (as well as scrypt coins, it uses two PoW algorithms, in addition to disbursing coins to players in the game).

I0coin is interested in participating with MeMiCA.  Great idea to stick together in a  competitive crypto environment when we have many overlapping requirements and many tools developed for one merge mined coin will easily translate to the other.

Developer github:  https://github.com/rsnel/i0coin (https://github.com/rsnel/i0coin)
Website:  http://izerocoin.org (http://izerocoin.org)
bitcointalk:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=624935.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=624935.0)

Huntercoin made that claim, however actually merging it resulted in no blocks found, which I reported at the time (long ago) and have not even seen them acknowledge the problem let alone announce they fixed it.

So as of last I checked their purported SHA256 merging does not apparently work.

Maybe their scrypt merging works though, I do not know.

-MarkM-

You may want to put each coin's logo on your top post and here's one for I0coin.

https://izerocoin.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/i0coin-small.png

Maybe you just found no blocks because f2pool/discusfish ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=700411.0 ) merge mines it with a boat load of hashrate. I know that there was also a myriadcoin p2pool that was setup to mergemine huntercoin sha256; the site is down now, but I remember them complaining about not finding (many/any?) blocks on huntercoin because of the massive hashrate of discusfish.

I'm available.  (As lead dev of the merge-mining part - of course, individual coin features would stay within the responsibility of the individual projects.)

Hello from i0coin to all you MeMiCA's!!!

I manage the website for i0coin.  I could help with a MeMiCA website when the time comes to roll one out.

My suggestion for doing something as a group that is difficult to do alone is to start some kind of payment service, store, gaming site, exchange, or the like to attract real users to the MeMiCA coins.  It should be something unique so we aren't just competing with all the other cryptos.  Something that could generate a genuine influx of loyal users.  The trick is to find something that hasn't already been done, or is an improvement over other services?

Payment service is the best choice.  "MEMICA Payment Services"

On coinmarketcap.com the top four MeMiCA coins sit in the positions below as of today.

14     Namecoin        $4,057,339
56     I0coin               $289,106
57     Ixcoin               $280,336
122   Devcoin              $72,579



But if you strip out the non-mineable coins it looks like this.

8       Namecoin       $4,057,339
22     I0coin               $289,106
23     Ixcoin               $280,336
54     Devcoin              $72,579

3 of the 4 MeMiCA coins with the highest market caps are in the top 25 positions among mineable coins.  As a group they are very well positioned.  We just need more development to bring them more visibility and utility for users.

Sounds good to me.  Going once... going twice...

Unobtanium is now available for merged mining since block 600k about 12 hours ago.
I'll be very interested in the progress of this group.


https://github.com/unobtanium-official/Unobtanium

http://unobtanium.uno

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=527500

From a quick glance, it looks like its auxpow code is (as with most) based off the original Namecoin auxpow.h/auxpow.cpp - so you should be able to switch to my "auxpow" branch of Bitcoin, if you desire.  Not sure what opinion else I can have at the moment. ;)

Likely  Freicoin will be merged in the future as that was/is the plan.

So, how to move forward?  As I have already written above, I maintain a branch of Bitcoin Core that adds nothing except for merge mining: https://github.com/namecoin/namecore/tree/auxpow

It is the basis of Namecoin's merge-mining implementation, but with minor changes (i. e., chain ID, auxpow start height and possibly some details in the auxpow verification if coins made changes to it), it should be applicable to other coins as well.  I keep it up-to-date with all the latest Bitcoin patches.

For the individual coins, the ultimate responsibility lies, of course, with the corresponding coin developer.  Thus, if you are a MeMiCA coin developer and want to benefit from shared merge-mining code, please take a look at my branch.  Try to rebase your coin off it if that is possible and you want to keep track of the latest Bitcoin patches.  If you can not do that, carefully look at the auxpow code in there and the one in your coin.  Feel free to contact me with any doubts you have, and I will try to support you as much as possible.

I'll attempt a IXC Port of it soon.

Ahmed

This is an excellent idea!

I've recently started mining p2pool merged with most of the coins listed in OP, but there seems to be some confusion about the ports required to do so, as I just mentioned in the p2pool thread:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg11471687#msg11471687

Maybe if the correct ports for each coin could be listed in the OP? This would save much confusion to noobs like me  ;) Particularly CLC & XGG - I can't find any info relating to those ports......


I found HUC to be working fine, I've already found a few blocks with p2pool merged  ;D

Ixcoin is no longer mined though right?

it is

anyone have any nodes for ixc?

already have all those....

That seemed to do the trick.

    "version" : 80600,
    "protocolversion" : 70001,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 0.00000000,
    "blocks" : 263078,
    "timeoffset" : -4,
    "connections" : 13,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 10660257161.44938087,
    "testnet" : false,
    "keypoololdest" : 1433299834,
    "keypoolsize" : 101,
    "paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
    "errors" : ""

I finally managed to compile GeistGeld, for the hell of it, does anyone have any active nodes for it?

There is also Fusioncoin that can be merge mined - it's a bit dead, but not as dead as others mentioned in the OP & the blockchain is still active:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=512149.0

Crowncoin was also looking for a dev to help implement merge mining, but the dev seems to have gone AWOL, although the website & blockchain seem healthy & trading can still be done on C-CEX:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=815487.0

It would be nice to see a dev step in & maybe resurrect these coins with updated code, with BTC difficulty going up & price staying low, merge mining is an excellent way to increase ones mining earnings & help stabilise other less used crypto coins.

You're the rider

The bicycle is the economy

Bitcoin is the big gear

http://s30.postimg.org/8jh2r5629/bike_gears_002.jpg

and here are all of the side chains
http://s10.postimg.org/k2up5fng9/gears.jpg

What the chain in the middle is, IS still up for debate

interesting thread

Heads up:


So, including BTC, I'm currently merge mining 11 coins  :)

BTC, DVC, FSC, HUC, I0C, IXC, NMC, GRP, UNO, CLC & WLC........any more for any more?

I never did get XGG to work properly with p2pool, memory usage went crazy, so if anyone has any hints/fixes - I'd like to make it 12........ :D

Fun, fun, fun.

Can you give a ball park percentage how much this increases your profit?

Is there a good tutorial on how to set up merge mining?

Hi phelix,

No...... :D :D

TBH I've never really seriously looked into the profitability side of it, for me it's all about bettering my Linux skills (or lack of  :)) while helping give stability & security to a few altcoins that may one day be "worth" mining - a hobby. After all, if it's purely profit people are after then home mining is the wrong game to be in atm...... :D I just find it very interesting & want to promote crypto as much as possible, I believe it's the future in one form or another & despise the current "system".

Regarding the tutorial, I was working on an updated guide for noobs myself, but put it on hold due to the current network attack & problems with a couple of merge mined clients (HUC & XGG) - I didn't want people to think they had done something wrong when they hadn't, so decided to wait until those issues are fixed before publishing it.

I was also thinking of posting a comprehensive list of all merge mined SHA256 coins with updated info, coin links & repos etc for p2pool users to use - but have had to postpone this for the same reasons. although it would be preferable if the OP would do that in this thread I think......?

I see p2pool merge mining as the only way to stop the rot of large miner farm centralization & it's inherent problems, especially with all the scam pools popping up all over the place - so just want to increase new crypto miners awareness. Profit is not my driving force, thank goodness. I'm happy if I break even!  ;D

Bitcoin is currently working on ideas to use more bits of a block's version field for activation of soft forks.  In particular, they want to use individual bits of the version integer to signal particular soft forks currently progressing.  This may become a problem with the current merge-mining protocol, which reserves bit 8 and all bits starting at 16 of the version itself.  I think it would be a great advantage to preserve compatibility with Bitcoin, and allow using their code without too many specific changes.

Thus, I would like to encourage discussion about a potential change to the merge-mining protocol that frees all 32 bits of the version field of blocks.  A possible solution is the following:  Require that every block has an auxpow structure following the first 80 bytes of the block header.  (Currently this is only the case for blocks that indicate with their version that they are merge-mined.)  Additionally, the auxpow structure itself is changed to include the extra information (merge-mined flag and chain ID) that is currently in the version.  E. g., even if a block is not merge-mined, it would contain some additional data following the block header that indicates that the block is not merge-mined.

Thoughts?

For what it's worth, I think anything that makes merge mine-able altcoins more compatible with Bitcoin & easier to integrate has got to be a good thing - it would certainly reduce the hours spent searching through code to see if it was capable of being merge mined, there seems to be a lack of information on many altcoin threads as to weather they are or not.

You're doing some great work btw domob - kudos!  :)

As long as there is no particular downside maybe we could stuff it into the next hardfork


@p3yot33at3r: +1 to p2pool

Thanks phelix  :)

My thoughts exactly.

Any dev who would be interested for the job? Please get back to me!

crowncoin.org

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=815487.0

Hi crowncoin_knight,

Good to see you here - did you hear back from the dev who emailed you? It's beyond my capabilities I'm afraid, but maybe if you offered a bounty of some kind?  ;)

It would be nice to implement merged mining in Cubits3, especially nice given that we so far have no hybrid PoW/PoS coins in the merged SHA256 family.

-MarkM-

Waiting for the response from him! Sure - a bounty is up for discussion!  ;)

Didnt someone already do it for crowncoin? I know i helped out the person that did it.

Ahmed

Hey ahmed,

Yeah - infernoman had a go at it, but it's unfinished:

https://github.com/Infernoman/Crowncoin--AUXPOW-

....I tried it out a few weeks ago......you gonna give it a shot?  ;) :)

I dunno. im pretty sure crowncoin was the one that had a bounty going for it and when i asked to work on it was told i was under qualified. Not much time on my hands at the moment either.

Ahmed

Under qualified?

You?

Joking right?  ;)

Strange that I am not aware of that someone from our team told you that...

Unfortunatelly not. Still looking for that dev

Bounty: 100k CRW + 1 BTC

I'll take up that bounty.

EDIT: I'll throw in an upgrade to btc 0.10? free of charge
Ahmed

Nice one Ahmed - if you need a p2pool tester, let me know  :)

Any news? Did the dev get back to you?

nope

Sorry - someone took the job. We have the merged mining ready - we are testing now. Will be online soon.

^ as expected...

Let me know if you need a tester for p2pool  ;)

Hello good sirs,

Continuing a conversation from another thread. Maybe there would be some interest in some coordinated building of buy and sell collumns accross several of these coins?

Id expect that we'd need to assess which coins need what support and go from there.

Thanks and good day.

A copy of bitcoin with the only change being to add support for being a child chain in a merge is the ideal thing to have for basing all the merged mined coins on, so thanks for that. I tried to build one of those long ago but never got it done before it became out of date.

Although come to think of it, even better would be that plus also with the RAM problems fixes also included, since all the merged coins will also need those fixes.

-MarkM-

The trick is to ensure XGG (GeistGeld) has a decently high difficulty before deploying p2pool.

When I was almost the only miner mining it, and certainly the only one mining it with enough hashing power to keep up a reasonable difficulty, its difficulty would collapse whenever my p2pool or daemon or miners had problems, because it adjusts/adapts its difficulty very swiftly.

p2pool would choke up, exhausting connection port data structures in the operating system or something like that, from constantly trying to open new connectinos to the daemon while hundreds or thousands of other such attempts were still waiting to time-out.

So what I had to do then was comment out XGG from my p2pool and direct some individual mining machines at it, such as a 50GHash Butterfly Labs miner or two for example, to drive its difficulty back up into the hundreds. Somewhere in the low hundreds or so of difficulty it would be difficulty enough that I could add it back into p2pool, BUT, NOTE THAT in those days I had no Neptune mining machines, just a Jupiter, so my p2pool was only running at somehing over 500GHashes (the Jupiter and some of the Butterfly Labs things and a whack of the early model USB miners).

I have not been able to use my Neptune miners with p2pool because no matter how few coins I merged in the p2pool I found I could only get about one terahash out of a Neptune that normally (e.g. with mmpool.org pool) gave me 3.4 terahashes.

Basically you need GeistGeld's difficulty to be high enough that however much hashpower you have in your instance of p2pool is not going to "instamine" it, it needs to be high enoguh that it will take your p2pool some seconds per block, so there is time to complete connections between blocks.

-MarkM-

I actually got it running nicely since posting that. I found the best option was to have it running in it's own screen session & merge mining it with a few other smaller diff coins on a smaller scale p2pool node as it struggled with my higher hash rate main node. It's been running stable with ~800Gh pointing at it for some time now. I leave the node running even when I'm not pointing any hash at it just to ensure it stays connected to the network..

They are also fixed in the branch, of course (in the way it is done for Namecoin).

BIP9 might break current merged mining...   https://forum.namecoin.info/viewtopic.php?p=16150#p16150

Terracoin (TRC) is undergoing a re-vamp & are considering integrating merge mining. One of the older coins, I think it would benefit greatly from this - please drop by their thread where they have a poll for merge mining implementation & show your support.

Thanks.

ASIC the business (a coin / a decentralized company / a network)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1428251.msg14444394#msg14444394

the above is a experiment to turn ASC into a very loose DAC
it may relate/coordinate with MeMiCA in attempting to market/promote MM to SHA256 pool ops

--
A Complete Guide to P2Pool - Merged Mining (BTC/NMC/DVC/IXC/I0C) plus LTC, Linux
February 06, 2012
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62842.0

Devcoin is looking for merge miners. A new Devcoin merge mining pool is in the works. Contact our lead developer and contact to that pool via bitcointalk PM: develcuy or even better, open an issue asking how to get involved with Devcoin merged mining here:

https://github.com/devcoin/core/issues

You can see posts about develCuy's progress on our WIP with Devcoin Core software adding merged mining. Time to wake up and reconnect :) - or consolidate our networks value together and take control from the spot price aggregators who don't value us properly or shut us out!

https://github.com/develCuy

Way to resurrect ancient 2016 thread.