Bitcoin Forum

Hello all.

I think p2p is the way of the future and would like to help create a p2p mining pool.

I have money and time but lack the technical skills needed to create this. If you have these skills and want to help make a p2p pool post in this thread or PM me.

One feature I would like it to have is a way that each miner can use their hashing power to vote. I have some ideas on how this could work but need to check it with someone a bit smarter than myself.

Thank you.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.0)
TA DA!
As for feature requests, developers always like to hear well reasoned and thought out ideas.

Why not just point your haschrate to p2pool ? There is no need for "another p2pool".

Best you ask the p2pool creator forrest something for help then.

I dont see how the bitcoin p2pool server would ever get "too slow" to handle all the load (should it be as fast 1TH/s) Because people (like myself) will run P2Pool in Server mode, It's Very easy to do, And takes up only as much bandwidth as bitcoin mining itself, Or even less!

I think the concern is that the internal difficulty of p2p pool gets too high for slow hashers to have some reasonably low variance. The load will always stay ~ the same, since the internal difficulty rises along with the hashrate of the pool.

I guess p2p pool can be modified to form another 2nd network, however if you anyways only want to mine with CPUs or with friends, better either join forces via a common "classic" server and plug this one into p2p pool or do PPS mining, as variance for a smaller pool then will again be huge - much bigger than joining in p2p pool.

If it became a problem, wouldn't you just fork P2Pool and use a different port/namespace for the protocol? No need to reinvent P2P pool software, you would only need to do something like that.

It could even be added to the official P2Pool implementation that it only connects to clients with "Even" or "Odd" 4th digitgroup IP addresses (for a contrived and oversimplistic example). Point being, we don't need another one unless you feel there are issues that need addressing with P2Pool's implementation.

He probably just wants to create something like http://p2poolparty.net/how_it_works.html

p2pool needs everyone it can get, to take down the centralized pools.

There is no use in fragmenting the p2pool network - keep it strong, nothing is set in stone btw - any fears are already either fixed or can be fixed easily :)

It could be possible to split the current p2pool pool into multiple sub-pools, all of which work on their respective share chains.

When searching for a block-chain to use, if the share difficulty is too high, the p2pool client attempts to find an another p2pool sub-pool to use which has a lower share difficulty.

+1, you could set-up max and min share diff in settings and p2pool would search a share-chain that meets the condition

This seems like such a great idea.  p2pool would automatically fragment itself into nodes that had overlapping ranges.  The problem is that there is no way to enforce which pool someone should be in.  If everyone wants to stay in the 100-400 difficulty pool, the feedback mechanism fails when it hits one of those two numbers, and the share clock breaks.