[ANN][PIVX] - PRIVATE INSTANT VERIFIED TRANSACTION - PROOF OF STAKE - ZEROCOIN

[waffles99]

-if the user is intending to set-up 'One single Local Masternode', receiving the 10,000 Dnet set-up (requirement) from say purchasing coins via an exchange, then the incoming transaction is likely to be met with an Obfuscation transaction fee payment from the balance (before the Masternode is enabled), thus leaving say a 9999.99981844 Dnet balance remaining and causing the user to receive the following unexpected message; "Not capable masternode: Could not find suitable coins!"

I solved this issue by deleting everything except the darknet.conf file in the .darknet folder of each remote node

[1714020877]

1714020877

[1714020877]

1714020877

[1714020877]

1714020877

[1714020877]

1714020877

[1714020877]

1714020877

[BitcoinFX]

Reporting a potential 'conflict of obfuscation' / Masternode activation issue when users set-up a new Masternode on a 0 balance wallet address, in regards to the v1.0.2.0 release setting: "Enabled Obfuscation by default, the new default is to keep 1000 DNET mixed with 8 rounds.".

I solved this issue by deleting everything except the darknet.conf file in the .darknet folder of each remote node

I'm referring to instances on 'One single Local Masternode' where the 10,000 Dnet balance is actually being received to the Masternode capable address.
 

[waffles99]

I'm referring to instances on 'One single Local Masternode' where the 10,000 Dnet balance is actually being received to the Masternode capable address.

If this error ccurs on the remote node after upgrading to 1.0.2.0

[BitcoinFX]

I'm referring to instances on 'One single Local Masternode' where the 10,000 Dnet balance is actually being received to the Masternode capable address.

If this error ccurs on the remote node after upgrading to 1.0.2.0

No. The issue would only potentially apply to the set-up of a new local Masternode on a 0 balance wallet address.

It is not a major issue. Just something that new folks setting up masternodes could be confused by.

The devs will understand what I'm referring to here.

[4x13]

I'm referring to instances on 'One single Local Masternode' where the 10,000 Dnet balance is actually being received to the Masternode capable address.

If this error ccurs on the remote node after upgrading to 1.0.2.0

No. The issue would only potentially apply to the set-up of a new local Masternode on a 0 balance wallet address.

It is not a major issue. Just something that new folks setting up masternodes could be confused by.

The devs will understand what I'm referring to here.

Yes, we understand exactly what you are referring to. While we would prefer that Obfuscation be ran 100% of the time by all users wallets, this option can be disabled if needed.

[AngusCanine]

When if at all will there be an android wallet?

[jakiman]

is this worth mining still?

Yes it is. Best to mine & hold of course.

[Hamukione]

Anyone here that can give a hand?

I am having issues with setting up my masternodes usings PJC's VPS.
The servers work fine, its just doing the setup of the wallet I am having issues with.

I have made config files for the nodes but when I do "Masternode outputs" it only shows 1 masternode and not all 4 I made.

Can anyone help me with this?

200 Dnet reward

EDIT:

NVM.. Getting help tomorrow
Thanks though.

[borris123]

Anyone here that can give a hand?

I am having issues with setting up my masternodes usings PJC's VPS.
The servers work fine, its just doing the setup of the wallet I am having issues with.

I have made config files for the nodes but when I do "Masternode outputs" it only shows 1 masternode and not all 4 I made.

Can anyone help me with this?

200 Dnet reward

link to setup guide in my sig.

[cryptomaxsun]

how long to wait for payment from Masternode ?

[borris123]

how long to wait for payment from Masternode ?

12 - 24 hours

[bathrobehero]

Reporting a potential 'conflict of obfuscation' / Masternode activation issue when users set-up a new Masternode on a 0 balance wallet address, in regards to the v1.0.2.0 release setting: "Enabled Obfuscation by default, the new default is to keep 1000 DNET mixed with 8 rounds."

- If the user is intending to set-up 'One single Local Masternode', receiving the 10,000 Dnet set-up (requirement) from say purchasing coins via an exchange, then the incoming transaction is likely to be met with an Obfuscation transaction fee payment from the balance (before the Masternode is enabled), thus leaving say a 9999.99981844 Dnet balance remaining and causing the user to receive the following unexpected message; "Not capable masternode: Could not find suitable coins!"

Which can ofc be easily resolved by sending just 1 more Dnet to the same address and then making a new transaction of 10,000 Dnet to the same (your own) wallet address to allow for successful Masternode activation.
  

+1, this is what I meant earlier.

Currently the only workaround is to turn off obfuscation as soon as the wallet starts and hope that you're not late.

It should be disabled by default or at least there should be a switch in the .conf file.

[borris123]

Reporting a potential 'conflict of obfuscation' / Masternode activation issue when users set-up a new Masternode on a 0 balance wallet address, in regards to the v1.0.2.0 release setting: "Enabled Obfuscation by default, the new default is to keep 1000 DNET mixed with 8 rounds."

- If the user is intending to set-up 'One single Local Masternode', receiving the 10,000 Dnet set-up (requirement) from say purchasing coins via an exchange, then the incoming transaction is likely to be met with an Obfuscation transaction fee payment from the balance (before the Masternode is enabled), thus leaving say a 9999.99981844 Dnet balance remaining and causing the user to receive the following unexpected message; "Not capable masternode: Could not find suitable coins!"

Which can ofc be easily resolved by sending just 1 more Dnet to the same address and then making a new transaction of 10,000 Dnet to the same (your own) wallet address to allow for successful Masternode activation.
  

+1, this is what I meant earlier.

Currently the only workaround is to turn off obfuscation as soon as the wallet starts and hope that you're not late.

It should be disabled by default or at least there should be a switch in the .conf file.

enableobfuscate=0

that will disable it

[BitcoinFX]

Reporting a potential 'conflict of obfuscation' / Masternode activation issue when users set-up a new Masternode on a 0 balance wallet address, in regards to the v1.0.2.0 release setting: "Enabled Obfuscation by default, the new default is to keep 1000 DNET mixed with 8 rounds."

- If the user is intending to set-up 'One single Local Masternode', receiving the 10,000 Dnet set-up (requirement) from say purchasing coins via an exchange, then the incoming transaction is likely to be met with an Obfuscation transaction fee payment from the balance (before the Masternode is enabled), thus leaving say a 9999.99981844 Dnet balance remaining and causing the user to receive the following unexpected message; "Not capable masternode: Could not find suitable coins!"

Which can ofc be easily resolved by sending just 1 more Dnet to the same address and then making a new transaction of 10,000 Dnet to the same (your own) wallet address to allow for successful Masternode activation.
  

+1, this is what I meant earlier.

Currently the only workaround is to turn off obfuscation as soon as the wallet starts and hope that you're not late.

It should be disabled by default or at least there should be a switch in the .conf file.

enableobfuscate=0

that will disable it

Yes adding enableobfuscate=0 in the .conf should disable it.

However, in the 'tested' new MN instance, it did not. Hence, why I'm reporting the issue.
  

[bathrobehero]

enableobfuscate=0

that will disable it

It works, thanks!

[BitcoinFX]

enableobfuscate=0

that will disable it

It works, thanks!

Indeed. In general this function will work OK.

However, IMHO Obfuscation Mixing should remain an optional choice for the user. Some users won't want this feature enabled automatically.

Perhaps this should be put to a MN vote, following 'testing' this in the current release ?

[cryptomaxsun]

Launched mastenodes more than 26 hours ago, in the active list is. Payments not.
If every day is generated 1440 blocks, and masternodes currently 567, then every 9-10 hours, payment must occur.
what's wrong? why so long no payments?

[borris123]

Launched mastenodes more than 26 hours ago, in the active list is. Payments not.
If every day is generated 1440 blocks, and masternodes currently 567, then every 9-10 hours, payment must occur.
what's wrong? why so long no payments?

I still haven't got a payment for one i set up other day but says it's active so that's all you can really go off. You get one soon

edit. I just restarted controller wallet and it said expired. Trying restarts of it now.

[cryptomaxsun]

After 30 hours of payment received 83.33 coins.

[4x13]

This initial period of time is always longer as the Masternode has to earn the weight to participate in the random drawing of the Masternode Reward payment.