[1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool

[IYFTech]

bmt ? lol just jk btw hahaha

how do u know someone is hammering your node & wut is he/she doing to yr node ?

Wouldn't surprise me......

Because it was constantly showing up in my p2pool window & being dropped.

[Duce]

bmt ? lol just jk btw hahaha

how do u know someone is hammering your node & wut is he/she doing to yr node ?

Wouldn't surprise me......

Because it was constantly showing up in my p2pool window & being dropped.

I had the same thing this past week, did it look like this? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg10066280#msg10066280

[IYFTech]

bmt ? lol just jk btw hahaha

how do u know someone is hammering your node & wut is he/she doing to yr node ?

Wouldn't surprise me......

Because it was constantly showing up in my p2pool window & being dropped.

I had the same thing this past week, did it look like this? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg10066280#msg10066280

Similar, but it was a handshake error every 30 seconds, or thereabouts.

[Duce]

bmt ? lol just jk btw hahaha

how do u know someone is hammering your node & wut is he/she doing to yr node ?

Wouldn't surprise me......

Because it was constantly showing up in my p2pool window & being dropped.

I had the same thing this past week, did it look like this? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg10066280#msg10066280

Similar, but it was a handshake error every 30 seconds, or thereabouts.

I would attribute the handshake error to the ports they were using. They hammered me for about 6 hours though.

[IYFTech]

bmt ? lol just jk btw hahaha

how do u know someone is hammering your node & wut is he/she doing to yr node ?

Wouldn't surprise me......

Because it was constantly showing up in my p2pool window & being dropped.

I had the same thing this past week, did it look like this? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg10066280#msg10066280

Similar, but it was a handshake error every 30 seconds, or thereabouts.

I would attribute the handshake error to the ports they were using. They hammered me for about 6 hours though.

Port was 9333.

[Duce]

bmt ? lol just jk btw hahaha

how do u know someone is hammering your node & wut is he/she doing to yr node ?

Wouldn't surprise me......

Because it was constantly showing up in my p2pool window & being dropped.

I had the same thing this past week, did it look like this? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg10066280#msg10066280

Similar, but it was a handshake error every 30 seconds, or thereabouts.

I would attribute the handshake error to the ports they were using. They hammered me for about 6 hours though.

Port was 9333.

Yeah that is what was strange with mine, they never used 9333 but some 5-digit ones that there in the reserved section.  Maybe I pissed somebody off......

[PatMan]

Well, glad I checked here before pulling the latest version - but of a cock-up eh?

bmt ? lol just jk btw hahaha

how do u know someone is hammering your node & wut is he/she doing to yr node ?

Wouldn't surprise me......

Because it was constantly showing up in my p2pool window & being dropped.

I had the same thing this past week, did it look like this? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=18313.msg10066280#msg10066280

Similar, but it was a handshake error every 30 seconds, or thereabouts.

I'm wondering if Bitmains "p2p"(?) pool isn't trying to connect to the real p2pool & p2pool is recognising that the share chains don't match, so drops it.....would this be possible?

[midnightmagic]

What exactly does this do?

M

Looks like it pulls and rotates the default mining addresses from bitcoind.

I saw that too.  Why would you want that?

Anyone else try this?  I'm getting errors all over the place:

My mistake. It's a pretty easy fix, non-impactful. I'm working on it now and should have it in a pullreq for forrest soon.

The reason you would want something like this is because normally, p2pool pays out to the same address over and over when it constructs its coinbases. But this isn't ideal: if you are ever identified, then your entire mining history might be laid bare for the world to see. You must maintain perfect opsec, forever, if you desire stronger financial privacy under this method of mining.

If you rotate keys on a programmable basis, then you get payouts to *different* addresses with no additional effort on your behalf and it is somewhat more difficult to correlate which addresses are grouped with one another until you spend them and group them yourself.

You could have achieved an approximation of this by having miners who were inputting some different addresses and accepting miner-supplied payout addresses, but then you have to do it by hand and it was really annoying.

In my opinion, p2pool users now have arguably more privacy even then solo miners, by using this option, at the expense of a larger coinbase.

(fwiw, considering the spam nonsense going into the blockchain right now, I hardly think miners demanding additional privacy is at the top of the list of UTXO bloat.)

[mdude77]

What exactly does this do?

M

Looks like it pulls and rotates the default mining addresses from bitcoind.

I saw that too.  Why would you want that?

Anyone else try this?  I'm getting errors all over the place:

My mistake. It's a pretty easy fix, non-impactful. I'm working on it now and should have it in a pullreq for forrest soon.

The reason you would want something like this is because normally, p2pool pays out to the same address over and over when it constructs its coinbases. But this isn't ideal: if you are ever identified, then your entire mining history might be laid bare for the world to see. You must maintain perfect opsec, forever, if you desire stronger financial privacy under this method of mining.

If you rotate keys on a programmable basis, then you get payouts to *different* addresses with no additional effort on your behalf and it is somewhat more difficult to correlate which addresses are grouped with one another until you spend them and group them yourself.

You could have achieved an approximation of this by having miners who were inputting some different addresses and accepting miner-supplied payout addresses, but then you have to do it by hand and it was really annoying.

In my opinion, p2pool users now have arguably more privacy even then solo miners, by using this option, at the expense of a larger coinbase.

(fwiw, considering the spam nonsense going into the blockchain right now, I hardly think miners demanding additional privacy is at the top of the list of UTXO bloat.)

This makes sense and I agree.  Now I'm unsure how to use it?

M

[tgros]

iv got a few unused servers as well. been mining a few months and was thiking about starting my own pool. Would there be a way to join our servers as one pool. lol if not no worries... how do u start your own pool. im on about 1th+

[PatMan]

iv got a few unused servers as well. been mining a few months and was thiking about starting my own pool. Would there be a way to join our servers as one pool. lol if not no worries... how do u start your own pool. im on about 1th+

Here's an excellent guide:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=651819.0;topicseen

By setting up your own node you are joining one large pool - that's the beauty of it.  

Edit: Use the manual instructions though, I think the scripts for auto setup are a little outdated.

[jonnybravo0311]

What exactly does this do?

M

Looks like it pulls and rotates the default mining addresses from bitcoind.

I saw that too.  Why would you want that?

Anyone else try this?  I'm getting errors all over the place:

My mistake. It's a pretty easy fix, non-impactful. I'm working on it now and should have it in a pullreq for forrest soon.

The reason you would want something like this is because normally, p2pool pays out to the same address over and over when it constructs its coinbases. But this isn't ideal: if you are ever identified, then your entire mining history might be laid bare for the world to see. You must maintain perfect opsec, forever, if you desire stronger financial privacy under this method of mining.

If you rotate keys on a programmable basis, then you get payouts to *different* addresses with no additional effort on your behalf and it is somewhat more difficult to correlate which addresses are grouped with one another until you spend them and group them yourself.

You could have achieved an approximation of this by having miners who were inputting some different addresses and accepting miner-supplied payout addresses, but then you have to do it by hand and it was really annoying.

In my opinion, p2pool users now have arguably more privacy even then solo miners, by using this option, at the expense of a larger coinbase.

(fwiw, considering the spam nonsense going into the blockchain right now, I hardly think miners demanding additional privacy is at the top of the list of UTXO bloat.)

While I understand the concept of rotating addresses, I don't understand how it's useful here.  Let's say that this was properly implemented in p2pool.  Who does it benefit?  As a miner, I still have to connect to a node using a BTC address.  I can't change that address constantly, or I'd always be ramping up shares on the chain for payout, which is exactly the opposite of what I want in a PPLNS pool.

What am I missing?

[PatMan]

I'm not sure I get it either tbh. I think there are much more pressing issues with p2pool that need to be addressed too.

[windpath]

While I understand the concept of rotating addresses, I don't understand how it's useful here.  Let's say that this was properly implemented in p2pool.  Who does it benefit?  As a miner, I still have to connect to a node using a BTC address.  I can't change that address constantly, or I'd always be ramping up shares on the chain for payout, which is exactly the opposite of what I want in a PPLNS pool.

What am I missing?

The benefit is specifically for the node owner using the bitcoind wallet on the node for mining income.

By using this, rather then setting an address with the miner you can simply use a name like AntS3 or SP20, the hash power will go to the node default address, which will now be cycled automatically increasing privacy and security.

To be honest the security benefits are a trade off, I would still feel better about not keeping any private keys on the node itself, but if privacy is a big concern for you this is probably a good trade off.

[jonnybravo0311]

While I understand the concept of rotating addresses, I don't understand how it's useful here.  Let's say that this was properly implemented in p2pool.  Who does it benefit?  As a miner, I still have to connect to a node using a BTC address.  I can't change that address constantly, or I'd always be ramping up shares on the chain for payout, which is exactly the opposite of what I want in a PPLNS pool.

What am I missing?

The benefit is specifically for the node owner using the bitcoind wallet on the node for mining income.

By using this, rather then setting an address with the miner you can simply use a name like AntS3 or SP20, the hash power will go to the node default address, which will now be cycled automatically increasing privacy and security.

To be honest the security benefits are a trade off, I would still feel better about not keeping any private keys on the node itself, but if privacy is a big concern for you this is probably a good trade off.

I get the concept behind it, and you cited precisely the example I was thinking about in my head.  However, this example still fails to benefit the node owner because the mining address is constantly cycling, which still means the node owner's address is ramping up on shares.  Sure, I suppose at the end of the day it would add up to the same thing - you'd just get a whole bunch of per share payouts to your node's cycling addresses instead of a larger payout to a single address.  However, that increases your transaction fees for spending those coins in the future because there'd have to be far more inputs.

Like I wrote, I just don't see how this could possibly benefit anyone except for the most paranoid tin-hat wearing folks running their own nodes.  For example, I run my own node locally, as well as a VPS-hosted node for backup when I travel.  I also fall back on your node in case neither of mine is available.  On my own nodes, sure I could put in something like a name of "S3_1" or "SP20" for each of my miners; however, configuration for your node forces me back into using a proper BTC address (which does not cycle)... unless of course I wish to donate my hashing power to you

[IYFTech]

Who's feeling brave today? 

https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool/pull/243

Not me......not today 

[idonothave]

small pypy howto

... download pypy binary, I choosed 64 bit version to my ubuntu 14.04 LTS
wget https://bitbucket.org/pypy/pypy/downloads/pypy-2.4.0-linux64.tar.bz2
... untar it
tar xvf pypy-2.4.0-linux64.tar.bz2
... create symbolic link
sudo ln -sf /where_untared/pypy-2.4.0-linux64/bin/pypy /usr/bin/pypy
... download pip manager
wget https://bootstrap.pypa.io/get-pip.py
... install pip manager
pypy get-pip.py
... install twisted
pip install twisted
... done

use pypy instead python

optional

... download latest forrestv p2pool version
git clone https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool.git
... run it
... make coffee

I try just now with latest git p2pool version 13.4-62-g077b2c1, seems well

[PatMan]

small pypy howto

... download pypy binary, I choosed 64 bit version to my ubuntu 14.04 LTS
wget https://bitbucket.org/pypy/pypy/downloads/pypy-2.4.0-linux64.tar.bz2
... untar it
tar xvf pypy-2.4.0-linux64.tar.bz2
... create symbolic link
sudo ln -sf /where_untared/pypy-2.4.0-linux64/bin/pypy /usr/bin/pypy
... download pip manager
wget https://bootstrap.pypa.io/get-pip.py
... install pip manager
pypy get-pip.py
... install twisted
pip install twisted
... done

use pypy instead python

optional

... download latest forrestv p2pool version
git clone https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool.git
... run it
... make coffee

I try just now with latest git p2pool version 13.4-62-g077b2c1, seems well

Have you noticed any improvement using pypy? I've often thought about trying it, as it's claimed to be much faster.

[idonothave]

small pypy howto

... download pypy binary, I choosed 64 bit version to my ubuntu 14.04 LTS
wget https://bitbucket.org/pypy/pypy/downloads/pypy-2.4.0-linux64.tar.bz2
... untar it
tar xvf pypy-2.4.0-linux64.tar.bz2
... create symbolic link
sudo ln -sf /where_untared/pypy-2.4.0-linux64/bin/pypy /usr/bin/pypy
... download pip manager
wget https://bootstrap.pypa.io/get-pip.py
... install pip manager
pypy get-pip.py
... install twisted
pip install twisted
... done

use pypy instead python

optional

... download latest forrestv p2pool version
git clone https://github.com/forrestv/p2pool.git
... run it
... make coffee

I try just now with latest git p2pool version 13.4-62-g077b2c1, seems well

Have you noticed any improvement using pypy? I've often thought about trying it, as it's claimed to be much faster.

I run it too short time to say definitely. But for the first view it seems be better. Efficiency went up (memory usage went up too from 500MB+ to 1500MB+), lower DOA. I have also installed latest bitcoind 0.9.4 (from git)... getblock template latencies seem went down. Previous average was 241ms, will see where it will move.

[PatMan]

....(memory usage went up too from 500MB+ to 1500MB+)...

Seriously!? 3 x more memory?