Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 04:23:27 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 [712] 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool  (Read 2032445 times)
notbatman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
January 23, 2016, 05:42:24 AM
 #14221



FUCK.

Quote
2016-01-22 20:52:30.212000 > Unhandled error in Deferred:
2016-01-22 20:52:30.212000 > Unhandled Error
2016-01-22 20:52:30.213000 > Traceback (most recent call last):
2016-01-22 20:52:30.213000 > Failure: twisted.internet.defer.TimeoutError: in ReplyMatcher

I've been seeing this scroll up constantly since the 95% orphan rate started in the last 24 hours. I should note my GBT latency is about 0.5s.

My p2pool window is a total jumble of various crap scrolling up now... punishing share..., peer sent entire transcation blah blablah, skipping from block..., unhandled error..., incomming connection... v14.., error while processing Event callbacks..., lost peer...

HOLY FUCK MAN!!

"peer referenced unknown" that's a new one...

LOST CONTACT WITH BITCOIND

oh what a surprise!
1481127807
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481127807

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481127807
Reply with quote  #2

1481127807
Report to moderator
1481127807
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481127807

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481127807
Reply with quote  #2

1481127807
Report to moderator
1481127807
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481127807

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481127807
Reply with quote  #2

1481127807
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
January 23, 2016, 07:04:57 AM
 #14222

Edit: I'm guessing -ck & kano have found a way to make it work?
Pool software that doesn't need a wallet will work with it. My comment was offtopic so I deleted it. Nonetheless, p2pool needs the wallet working.

P2Pool does not require the wallet functionality as long as you use -a when starting to set a payout address.

p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
January 23, 2016, 01:12:04 PM
 #14223

Edit: I'm guessing -ck & kano have found a way to make it work?
Pool software that doesn't need a wallet will work with it. My comment was offtopic so I deleted it. Nonetheless, p2pool needs the wallet working.

P2Pool does not require the wallet functionality as long as you use -a when starting to set a payout address.

Yeah, that's what I use on my node - do you think pruning might work using this configuration windpath?
windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
January 23, 2016, 03:11:50 PM
 #14224

Edit: I'm guessing -ck & kano have found a way to make it work?
Pool software that doesn't need a wallet will work with it. My comment was offtopic so I deleted it. Nonetheless, p2pool needs the wallet working.

P2Pool does not require the wallet functionality as long as you use -a when starting to set a payout address.

Yeah, that's what I use on my node - do you think pruning might work using this configuration windpath?

I thought it would work without it Wink

Richy_T
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k


View Profile
January 23, 2016, 07:45:59 PM
 #14225


P2Pool does not require the wallet functionality as long as you use -a when starting to set a payout address.

This is how I roll.

1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k
photon_coin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 312


Photon --- The First Child Of Blake Coin --Merged


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2016, 05:52:01 AM
 #14226

a shame so little hash power on p2pool

p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
January 24, 2016, 10:25:46 AM
 #14227

a shame so little hash power on p2pool

Indeed - & my server just suffered a catastrophic failure & went down. I'm not sure if it's the mobo or SSD yet, looks like my Sunday will be spent knee-deep in parts while I search for the problem.

Great!  Cheesy
Gyrsur
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498


#BEL+++++


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2016, 11:21:31 PM
 #14228

a question regarding this below. how is the progress of the development of p2pool?

thank you very much!


P2P Mode:

The p2pool protocol prevents hashing power being controlled by one central entity (the pool owner), and has been significantly developed during the development of Antpool. All p2pool code have been open sourced and uploaded on BITMAIN's Github link https://github.com/bitmaintech/p2pool. We hope that we can optimize the p2p protocol and network with other interested engineers around the world.

We believe p2pool protocol has great potential, however, it is not developed very well till now.

Firstly, p2pool protocol's total hash rate is low compared with the whole network's, which is around only 2% of it as of Nov 2014. So p2pool's output is still not quite stable. There is a network effect barrier we need to break, then the p2pool protocol will have stable output and more miners will join the protocol. One of the most import reason for this is that there is not a well developed p2pool agent mining pool. If there is a well developed agent as the p2p.antpool.com, the total hashrate of p2pool will be significantly increased.

Secondly, the protocol of p2pool network is already optimized a lot, but for average miners, it is not as efficient as it could be, especially for some low bandwidth miners, whom will not be affected if they are connected to a normal stratum mining pool. We hope our efforts will help the community feel easier to set up p2pool mining nodes running with high efficiency.

If p2pool protocol can provide a more stable output, and the code is published, we hope that there will be more and more independent p2pool mining nodes around the world. There are lots of enterprise level miners around the world. I think it will be in the best interest for themselves to run their own p2pool mining nodes, if we can develop it into a convenient, reliable and efficient tools.

p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
January 25, 2016, 12:16:04 AM
 #14229

It isn't.
It has never worked.
It's not & never was part of the p2pool framework or sharechain.
It was an attempt to hijack p2pool that failed.
It is a lie.
jedimstr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784



View Profile
January 25, 2016, 08:14:34 AM
 #14230

It isn't.
It has never worked.
It's not & never was part of the p2pool framework or sharechain.
It was an attempt to hijack p2pool that failed.
It is a lie.

Just like The Cake.

nicklello
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 119


View Profile
January 25, 2016, 03:19:50 PM
 #14231

It isn't.
It has never worked.
It's not & never was part of the p2pool framework or sharechain.
It was an attempt to hijack p2pool that failed.
It is a lie.

Having just read through the code checked in to github; I'm not so sure.... I probably missed it but the changes all seem to be 'above board' in that they:

* Added database logging of shares
* Added user authentication

And not a lot else.... is it possible they crippled their nodes by simply denying them access to other nodes outside of their own domain; either by purposely configuring firewalls to do so or simply not configuring their firewalls correctly ?

Has anyone tried connecting to their p2pool server using the -n option ?
p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
January 25, 2016, 04:16:48 PM
 #14232

It isn't.
It has never worked.
It's not & never was part of the p2pool framework or sharechain.
It was an attempt to hijack p2pool that failed.
It is a lie.

Having just read through the code checked in to github; I'm not so sure.... I probably missed it but the changes all seem to be 'above board' in that they:

* Added database logging of shares
* Added user authentication

And not a lot else.... is it possible they crippled their nodes by simply denying them access to other nodes outside of their own domain; either by purposely configuring firewalls to do so or simply not configuring their firewalls correctly ?

Has anyone tried connecting to their p2pool server using the -n option ?

Have a read of the thread from the beginning, particularly this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=855548.msg9519703#msg9519703

I read through it a couple of times when I was looking for the best pool option for me before opting for p2pool (the real one), it really put me off Bitmain tbh - especially the posts from that dogie guy who worked for Bitmain at the time, he didn't have a clue about the workings of p2pool, neither did anyone else at Bitmain as it turned out. It was just an attempt by Bitmain to jump on the decentralisation bandwagon, when in fact the complete opposite was true.
windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
January 25, 2016, 04:29:09 PM
 #14233

It was just an attempt by Bitmain to jump on the decentralisation bandwagon, when in fact the complete opposite was true.

It ended up being pure marketing hype that Bitmain ended up milking long after they had been called out on it...

p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
January 25, 2016, 05:12:50 PM
 #14234

It was just an attempt by Bitmain to jump on the decentralisation bandwagon, when in fact the complete opposite was true.

It ended up being pure marketing hype that Bitmain ended up milking long after they had been called out on it...

The worst thing is they continue to lie about it in their OP - I've posted requests for moderators to force them to change their OP on several occasions, but they've been ignored. Why, I just don't know.
nicklello
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 119


View Profile
January 25, 2016, 05:19:15 PM
 #14235

Have a read of the thread from the beginning, particularly this post:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=855548.msg9519703#msg9519703

I read through it a couple of times when I was looking for the best pool option for me before opting for p2pool (the real one), it really put me off Bitmain tbh - especially the posts from that dogie guy who worked for Bitmain at the time, he didn't have a clue about the workings of p2pool, neither did anyone else at Bitmain as it turned out. It was just an attempt by Bitmain to jump on the decentralisation bandwagon, when in fact the complete opposite was true.

Thanks for the pointer, it was an interesting read...... I do agree that antpool.com is/was as you say an attempt to gain off the back of p2pool.

HOWEVER, looking at what they *did* put up on github some of their work appears to have merit....
windpath
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


View Profile WWW
January 25, 2016, 05:57:44 PM
 #14236

...

HOWEVER, looking at what they *did* put up on github some of their work appears to have merit....

I'm not sure I see it?

- They broke pseudonymous mining by adding a username and password
- They added a centralized DB to track this info
- They broke decentralization, you would have to "register" on every node running this code
- They broke it's DoS resistance as you would have to register on every node you might failover to
- They broke trustless payouts, you have to trust them to fairly distribute your payout

Starting to sound a lot like a centralized pool Wink

Maybe I'm missing something??

jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
January 25, 2016, 08:21:05 PM
 #14237

You aren't missing a thing... and that's exactly what I called them on when I first looked at their code in the github repo.  They quickly gave up the whole p2pool development thing they were doing, and haven't touched it in over a year.  They didn't know what they were doing then, and haven't bothered to try and understand it since; however, they'll still gladly claim they're supporting p2pool and decentralization.

Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow!  Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets!  No SPV cheats.  No empty blocks.
-ck
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2002


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
January 25, 2016, 08:56:53 PM
 #14238

Further into the antpool thread was also this:

I agree in that it most likely didn't work as they planned.

You are right on the money with that.

I have finally had a skype text chat with the main Chinese Bitmain software engineers and unfortunately it's precisely as I predicted. In principle they wanted to help decentralise and saw p2pool as the obvious way to get involved and would be good publicity for them. Unfortunately they spent a lot of time fixing their regular pool first and just left this announcement up almost as a "preorder for a better p2pool". However they misunderstood the issues with p2pool and thought that all it needed was more coding expertise and manpower contributed to development to fix it and have only just started investigating it now.  While they can clearly improve on the existing code - and probably will unless the project gets canned - after I queried them about what solutions they had for the intrinsic p2pool protocol limitations/problems, they had precisely zero valid solutions for them.

Primary developer/maintainer for cgminer and ckpool/ckproxy.
Pooled mine at kano.is, solo mine at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
p3yot33at3r
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266



View Profile
January 25, 2016, 09:11:36 PM
 #14239

I was looking for that post but couldn't remember where I had read it - thanks -ck!  Smiley
idonothave
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 234


View Profile
January 27, 2016, 12:52:29 PM
 #14240

if there was bitcoin fork with p2pool mining system implemented, would any little miner think about to mine with pools?
Pages: « 1 ... 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 [712] 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 »
  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!