[ATTN POOL OPS] List of pools' transaction policies.

[kinlo]

Triplemining currently does everything with default settings from the 0.7.2 client.  So no filtering, 250kb blocks etc etc
At least for now, I'm waiting for 0.8.1 before I start playing again with the values

[grue]

No:

• This is biased to support SatoshiDice's DDoS attack against Bitcoin. Instead of "transaction discrimination", it should be "anti-flooding filter quality"

agreed, "discrimination" has a negative connotation to it.

change it to "transaction filtering" or "ignored transactions"

[doublec]

Bitparking is currently using all the default settings from the 0.7.2 client.

[organofcorti]

No:

• This is biased to support SatoshiDice's DDoS attack against Bitcoin. Instead of "transaction discrimination", it should be "anti-flooding filter quality"

agreed, "discrimination" has a negative connotation to it.

change it to "transaction filtering" or "ignored transactions"

Fixed. I was getting around to doing it, then that stupid Berkeley database ruined everything and I forgot.

Bitparking is currently using all the default settings from the 0.7.2 client.

Thanks, doublec.

I'm not planning on updating the OP until there's a patch or there's no bdb clients left - until then block sizes will be limited to default for pretty much everyone. Although I suppose I could keep the "tx filtering" updated.

[Graet]

No:

• This is biased to support SatoshiDice's DDoS attack against Bitcoin. Instead of "transaction discrimination", it should be "anti-flooding filter quality"

agreed, "discrimination" has a negative connotation to it.

change it to "transaction filtering" or "ignored transactions"

Fixed. I was getting around to doing it, then that stupid Berkeley database ruined everything and I forgot.

Bitparking is currently using all the default settings from the 0.7.2 client.

Thanks, doublec.

I'm not planning on updating the OP until there's a patch or there's no bdb clients left - until then block sizes will be limited to default for pretty much everyone. Although I suppose I could keep the "tx filtering" updated.

Looks like not all pools are on the defaults despite all that has happened this week
http://blockchain.info/block-index/358797/00000000000001ba4bd010816667d2706fc0ddb3b258835c7d40d2a8c4d2b6a9
617kB from HHTT

[organofcorti]

No:

• This is biased to support SatoshiDice's DDoS attack against Bitcoin. Instead of "transaction discrimination", it should be "anti-flooding filter quality"

agreed, "discrimination" has a negative connotation to it.

change it to "transaction filtering" or "ignored transactions"

Fixed. I was getting around to doing it, then that stupid Berkeley database ruined everything and I forgot.

Bitparking is currently using all the default settings from the 0.7.2 client.

Thanks, doublec.

I'm not planning on updating the OP until there's a patch or there's no bdb clients left - until then block sizes will be limited to default for pretty much everyone. Although I suppose I could keep the "tx filtering" updated.

Looks like not all pools are on the defaults despite all that has happened this week
http://blockchain.info/block-index/358797/00000000000001ba4bd010816667d2706fc0ddb3b258835c7d40d2a8c4d2b6a9
617kB from HHTT

HHTT has figured out bdb's limits, and is using those?

[doublec]

HHTT has figured out bdb's limits, and is using those?

They might be doing what I'm doing. My 0.8.0 stratum server node is connected behind a 0.7.2 node so if it sends a bad block the 0.7.2 node will stop it before propagating it to the network. My stratum server is at the defaults though since I'd rather not orphan a block and halt my 0.7.2 getwork node.

[organofcorti]

HHTT has figured out bdb's limits, and is using those?

They might be doing what I'm doing. My 0.8.0 stratum server node is connected behind a 0.7.2 node so if it sends a bad block the 0.7.2 node will stop it before propagating it to the network. My stratum server is at the defaults though since I'd rather not orphan a block and halt my 0.7.2 getwork node.

If fireduck is doing what you are but with the 0.8.0 server at accepting larger blocks, he will want to fix that fast - a PPS pool does not want orphans.

[miernik]

Now that 0.8.2 is out, perhaps pool operators can start updating the list, especially that the default minimum low-priority fee in pre-0.8.2 is 0.0005 BTC/kB and from 0.8.2 is 0.0001 BTC/kB, so its quite important to see which pools use which policies.

[Luke-Jr]

Now that 0.8.2 is out, perhaps pool operators can start updating the list, especially that the default minimum low-priority fee in pre-0.8.2 is 0.0005 BTC/kB and from 0.8.2 is 0.0001 BTC/kB, so its quite important to see which pools use which policies.

Not quite. I'm pretty sure the 0.0005 BTC was only for sending fees.
The reason behind reducing it was that miners were already accepting the lower fees anyway.