Bitcoin Forum
November 25, 2017, 10:04:13 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] Stratum mining protocol - ASIC ready  (Read 143699 times)
flower1024
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 12:03:51 PM
 #81

...my bfl asic...

Looks like you care about decentralized mining, but don't care about centralized manufacturing of miners, which is much bigger risk for bitcoin network Smiley <sarcasm/>

LoL, your point Wink

1511604253
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511604253

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511604253
Reply with quote  #2

1511604253
Report to moderator
1511604253
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511604253

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511604253
Reply with quote  #2

1511604253
Report to moderator
1511604253
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511604253

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511604253
Reply with quote  #2

1511604253
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now Coinlancer is Disrupting the Freelance marketplace!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Luke-Jr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 12:16:25 PM
 #82

About CPU resources - as usual, Luke is mixing all stuff together. GBT is quite complex specs, so:

a) You can achieve quite similar result as stratum with GBT, which is *almost* as effective on validating shares as stratum (i don't want to dig into differences for this moment), but it is *not* decentralized.
No, GBT is always decentralized; while a centralized extension would be possible, there isn't one (yet?).
b) You can achieve decentralization, by leave tx selection and block creation to the miners, but then validating of shares became real hell on the pool side and bandwidth usage and I'm almost sure that no major pool is going to support *this* possibility, because it's insanely difficult to validate everything properly.
There are other easier ways to cheat the pool out of blocks than including phony transactions, so if your pool is really so strained you could simply skip validating them. The only risk is a miner who is accidentally making invalid blocks - that can likely be countered by doing a full check only occasionally. Bandwidth use is mostly unchanged, if you use workids (or similar) to cache the templates being mined.

b) We (at least me and other pool ops and miners) want some very optimized protocol which will minimize usage of all resources to minimum. This was missing until now, but with Stratum it is DONE.
Hindsight is always better, but... it would have been nice if you had worked with us and brought up your concerns sometime between February and July so GBT could have taken them into consideratoin. It's a shame to need two totally unrelated protocols for almost identical use cases. I also don't see why miner software authors (whose development is mostly made up of donations) should be expected to have to deal with it simply because a few big pools (with fees and income) demand yet even more savings on top of what GBT already gets them. It makes sense for some individual miners (who run their rigs off cellular modems or something?) might need to reduce bandwidth, but there's no reason they couldn't run a private proxy that does a Stratum-like centralization on their own non-limited connection somewhere.

I'm not here to say that everybody HAVE TO mine on centralized pool. I just give a possibility to do centralized mining as easy as possible, replacing current non-optimized, but widely supported getwork on the pools. Why not to have such option?
Option implies miners have a choice to mine decentralized on your pool. Are you saying that will be possible?

Actually decentralization was a problem in times when only my pool and maybe deepbit were available. Now with tens of pools it ends up with *almost* decentralized network, which is still very effective (or can be, after replacing getwork to any better solution).
"Almost" decentralized network only protects against 51% attacks (and then, only if the few people making up 51% aren't compromised); there are other attacks that can be done with less.

...my bfl asic...
Looks like you care about decentralized mining, but don't care about centralized manufacturing of miners, which is much bigger risk for bitcoin network Smiley <sarcasm/>
I'm sure you're aware since you noted sarcasm, but just to clarify explicitly: there is no risk at all to the Bitcoin network from "centralized" manufacturing provided the distribution/use is indiscriminate (which BFL has promised, although other ASIC vendor(s) aren't so Bitcoin-friendly apparently).

gyverlb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 12:26:02 PM
 #83

p2pool: i like it. but it has failed.
Care to elaborate at what p2pool has failed? I'm pretty satisfied with it myself and I monitor actual payouts vs expected payouts quite closely...

P2pool tuning guide
Trade BTC for €/$ at bitcoin.de (referral), it's cheaper and faster (acts as escrow and lets the buyers do bank transfers).
Tip: 17bdPfKXXvr7zETKRkPG14dEjfgBt5k2dd
flower1024
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 12:33:24 PM
 #84

p2pool: i like it. but it has failed.
Care to elaborate at what p2pool has failed? I'm pretty satisfied with it myself and I monitor actual payouts vs expected payouts quite closely...

last time i used it my payouts where not close to expected (but this is about half year ago). and i had a problem because i got so many small payouts that i have to pay a huge fee whenever i wanted to send out the bitcoins (ok, i could use mtgox wallet to avoid that)

i would consider p2pool a success if they have about 40% of the network - but i dont know if they even have a solution to handle that situation.

slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 12:38:43 PM
 #85

No, GBT is always decentralized; while a centralized extension would be possible, there isn't one (yet?).

In previous days you stated:
a) GBT is decentralized
b) GBT can do the same thing as getwork
c) GBT can do the same thing as stratum

Can you then elaborate, how you can do the same as stratum and getwork decentralized *at the same time* with single implementation of GBT? You obviously cannot. Because you're talking about different use cases of the specs every time.

Quote
There are other easier ways to cheat the pool out of blocks than including phony transactions, so if your pool is really so strained you could simply skip validating them.

Actually you're saying that operators are evil (although all blocks generated by pools can be easily checked in block explorer) and miners honest, right?

Of course every sane pool op *have to* check submitted shares. Checking PoW is the main purpose of the pool and he will fail if he will accept broken share in any way.

Quote
Hindsight is always better, but... it would have been nice if you had worked with us and brought up your concerns sometime between February and July so GBT could have taken them into consideratoin

Stop this bullshit, please.

Quote
few big pools (with fees and income) demand yet even more savings on top of what GBT already gets them.

This is about free market. Only those who can minimize running cost will survive. And we're talking about multiplying montly costs for running pool, when deciding between GBT (full implementation, not using "shortcuts" as not validating all shares) and Stratum. Of course that pools which can minimize running cost can go lower with the fees.

Joshwaa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 452



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 01:21:59 PM
 #86

Slush would this be the correct place to ask about a problem with my STRATUM install on a linux box?

Like what I said : 1JosHWaA2GywdZo9pmGLNJ5XSt8j7nzNiF
Don't like what I said : 1FuckU1u89U9nBKQu4rCHz16uF4RhpSTV
Don't Like BFL's Project Management : 1FuckbFLZpmWLuyHyFJw1RGkWm3yRM1L5D
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 01:23:45 PM
 #87

Joshwaa - yes. What's the problem?

Joshwaa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 452



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 01:39:25 PM
 #88

I am getting this message along with a bunch of rejects after the message. I am sure it is probably due to my lack of Linux knowledge.

Like what I said : 1JosHWaA2GywdZo9pmGLNJ5XSt8j7nzNiF
Don't like what I said : 1FuckU1u89U9nBKQu4rCHz16uF4RhpSTV
Don't Like BFL's Project Management : 1FuckbFLZpmWLuyHyFJw1RGkWm3yRM1L5D
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 01:52:06 PM
 #89

Can I ask you which version of Twisted do you have installed? I'm using some feature which looks missing on your machine...

Joshwaa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 452



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 02:01:43 PM
 #90

This help?
Package python-twisted-8.2.0-3.1.el6.noarch already installed and latest version
Nothing to do

Like what I said : 1JosHWaA2GywdZo9pmGLNJ5XSt8j7nzNiF
Don't like what I said : 1FuckU1u89U9nBKQu4rCHz16uF4RhpSTV
Don't Like BFL's Project Management : 1FuckbFLZpmWLuyHyFJw1RGkWm3yRM1L5D
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 02:03:03 PM
 #91

Yes, it's quite old version. I just pushed new version of the proxy to the github, please update.
New version requires newer twisted and I removed that problematic code (I used one internal variable which may be removed in the future releases). This should fix your issue.

You should run "python setup.py install" as a root to install newest twisted.

Joshwaa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 452



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 02:17:59 PM
 #92

It returns an error when trying to install twisted during setup. I will try to get a capture of the error.

Like what I said : 1JosHWaA2GywdZo9pmGLNJ5XSt8j7nzNiF
Don't like what I said : 1FuckU1u89U9nBKQu4rCHz16uF4RhpSTV
Don't Like BFL's Project Management : 1FuckbFLZpmWLuyHyFJw1RGkWm3yRM1L5D
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 02:28:36 PM
 #93

Quote
Package python-twisted-8.2.0-3.1.el6.noarch already installed and latest version

Looks like your platform don't have newer version of tsited? What the hell is el6?

Btw it should work with older version of twisted as well, after I fixed the bug itself. Give it a try.

flower1024
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 02:30:22 PM
 #94

Quote
Package python-twisted-8.2.0-3.1.el6.noarch already installed and latest version

Looks like your platform don't have newer version of tsited? What the hell is el6?

Btw it should work with older version of twisted as well, after I fixed the bug itself. Give it a try.

el6 -> CentOs6

slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 02:34:57 PM
 #95

Latest twisted can be found here: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Twisted/12.2.0 and it is platform independent, so I don't see any reason why it should not work for Centos6 as well. It's quite strange that setup.py don't install latest version automatically.

Joshwaa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 452



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 03:50:02 PM
 #96

I fixed it! For any others having this problem on ClearOS or CentOS 6.x

Run this "sudo yum install python-devel python-crypto pyOpenSSL zope"


Like what I said : 1JosHWaA2GywdZo9pmGLNJ5XSt8j7nzNiF
Don't like what I said : 1FuckU1u89U9nBKQu4rCHz16uF4RhpSTV
Don't Like BFL's Project Management : 1FuckbFLZpmWLuyHyFJw1RGkWm3yRM1L5D
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile WWW
September 19, 2012, 03:52:20 PM
 #97

Good to know it's working for you. python-devel is suggested on github howto, but I don't see a reason for python-crypto, pyOpenSSL and especially for zope. Are you sure it won't work without these dependencies?

Joshwaa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 452



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 03:57:45 PM
 #98

I had tried manually installing twisted and python no luck. That was the only thing that would get my machine to allow the install without errors.

Stratum 0.8 is the new one?

Like what I said : 1JosHWaA2GywdZo9pmGLNJ5XSt8j7nzNiF
Don't like what I said : 1FuckU1u89U9nBKQu4rCHz16uF4RhpSTV
Don't Like BFL's Project Management : 1FuckbFLZpmWLuyHyFJw1RGkWm3yRM1L5D
dooferorg
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 156


View Profile
September 19, 2012, 04:45:44 PM
 #99

It makes sense for some individual miners (who run their rigs off cellular modems or something?) might need to reduce bandwidth, but there's no reason they couldn't run a private proxy that does a Stratum-like centralization on their own non-limited connection somewhere.

You mean like I have running right now  Wink .. I don't have dialup, but still saving bandwidth is important so the new mining hardware doesn't DDOS your shiny pool by saturating the pools line.

If the GBT thing has been around since February, why aren't all pools and miners already using it?

I am admittedly very new to bitcoin, but not so for software design and programming. That being said, it's just my 2 Satoshis.

BTC: 1dooferoD3vnwgez3Jo1E4bFfgMf81LR2
ZEC: t1gnToN2HZW4GD52kofEVdijhRijWjCNfYi
Joshwaa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 452



View Profile
September 19, 2012, 05:00:51 PM
 #100

Sorry that was incorrect zope and pyOpenSSL were actually not needed. That was for something else.

Like what I said : 1JosHWaA2GywdZo9pmGLNJ5XSt8j7nzNiF
Don't like what I said : 1FuckU1u89U9nBKQu4rCHz16uF4RhpSTV
Don't Like BFL's Project Management : 1FuckbFLZpmWLuyHyFJw1RGkWm3yRM1L5D
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!