mrbodz
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
May 18, 2015, 09:56:34 AM |
|
I'll attempt a IXC Port of it soon.
Ahmed
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
May 28, 2015, 11:38:16 AM |
|
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#msg11471687Maybe if the correct ports for each coin could be listed in the OP? This would save much confusion to noobs like me ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Particularly CLC & XGG - I can't find any info relating to those ports...... 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).
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- I found HUC to be working fine, I've already found a few blocks with p2pool merged ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif)
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
May 29, 2015, 08:31:49 AM |
|
iXcoin
Bitcoin's operating port 8333 is changed to 8337 with Ixcoin.
Bitcoin's RPC server port 8332 is defaulted to 8338 in Ixcoin.
Ixcoin is no longer mined though right?
|
|
|
|
mrbodz
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
May 29, 2015, 10:57:19 AM |
|
it is
|
|
|
|
crackfoo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1126
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 03, 2015, 02:55:18 AM |
|
anyone have any nodes for ixc?
|
ZPOOL - the miners multipool! Support We pay 10 FLUX Parallel Assets (PA) directly to block rewards! Get paid more and faster. No PA fee's or waiting around for them, paid instantly on every block found!
|
|
|
crackfoo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1126
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 04, 2015, 12:21:33 AM |
|
already have all those....
|
ZPOOL - the miners multipool! Support We pay 10 FLUX Parallel Assets (PA) directly to block rewards! Get paid more and faster. No PA fee's or waiting around for them, paid instantly on every block found!
|
|
|
crackfoo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1126
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 05, 2015, 03:17:42 PM |
|
already have all those.... Can these ones be useful? 212.74.236.210 82.200.205.30 118.244.207.8 188.138.106.130 64.156.193.100 116.14.28.167 188.165.82.228 81.193.232.16 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" : ""
|
ZPOOL - the miners multipool! Support We pay 10 FLUX Parallel Assets (PA) directly to block rewards! Get paid more and faster. No PA fee's or waiting around for them, paid instantly on every block found!
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 09, 2015, 10:44:33 AM |
|
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=512149.0Crowncoin 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=815487.0It 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.
|
|
|
|
JohnnyBTCSeed
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 16, 2015, 06:21:45 PM |
|
You're the rider The bicycle is the economy Bitcoin is the big gear ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fs30.postimg.org%2F8jh2r5629%2Fbike_gears_002.jpg&t=665&c=IpgzHcDgBgH26g) and here are all of the side chains ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fs10.postimg.org%2Fk2up5fng9%2Fgears.jpg&t=665&c=6RDdt6Y5HRCXRA) What the chain in the middle is, IS still up for debate
|
|
|
|
photon_coin
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 28, 2015, 02:54:34 AM |
|
interesting thread
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 30, 2015, 10:20:13 PM |
|
Heads up: So, including BTC, I'm currently merge mining 11 coins ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) 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........ ![Cheesy](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif) Fun, fun, fun.
|
|
|
|
phelix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1020
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 08, 2015, 08:10:32 AM |
|
So, including BTC, I'm currently merge mining 11 coins ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) BTC, DVC, FSC, HUC, I0C, IXC, NMC, GRP, UNO, CLC & WLC........any more for any more? 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?
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 08, 2015, 10:05:36 AM |
|
So, including BTC, I'm currently merge mining 11 coins ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) BTC, DVC, FSC, HUC, I0C, IXC, NMC, GRP, UNO, CLC & WLC........any more for any more? 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...... ![Cheesy](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif) 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 ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) ) 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...... ![Cheesy](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif) 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! ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif)
|
|
|
|
domob
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1135
Merit: 1170
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 08, 2015, 10:08:13 AM |
|
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?
|
Use your Namecoin identity as OpenID: https://nameid.org/Donations: 1 domobKsPZ5cWk2kXssD8p8ES1qffGUCm | NMC: NC domobcmcmVdxC5yxMitojQ4tvAtv99pY BM-GtQnWM3vcdorfqpKXsmfHQ4rVYPG5pKS | GPG 0xA7330737
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 08, 2015, 11:04:55 AM |
|
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! ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
|
phelix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1020
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 08, 2015, 03:22:50 PM |
|
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?
As long as there is no particular downside maybe we could stuff it into the next hardfork @p3yot33at3r: +1 to p2pool
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 08, 2015, 04:55:04 PM |
|
@p3yot33at3r: +1 to p2pool
Thanks phelix ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) My thoughts exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
p3yot33at3r
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 12, 2015, 11:00:40 AM |
|
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? ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
|
|
|
|
markm
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1090
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 12, 2015, 01:32:02 PM Last edit: October 24, 2015, 07:46:21 PM by markm |
|
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-
|
|
|
|
|