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

[p3yot33at3r]

Whee, I got a chunk of this one. I'll be back on board as soon as I can work out not killing my daughter's ping.

i restrict to 30 connexions and 150MB of cache.

I only use 16 connections & it runs fine, in fact, up until recently I used to only used 12 connections as my internet speed is crap  

[Richy_T]

Whee, I got a chunk of this one. I'll be back on board as soon as I can work out not killing my daughter's ping.

it's not the P2Pool that it kill your connexion ... it's the Bitcoin Core upload block to users.
restrict the connexion of Bitcoin Core (but, keep in mind that P2Pool can be block because of this, the lack of opened connexion).

i restrict to 30 connexions and 150MB of cache.

Nah, it was pretty definitely correlated to starting and stopping p2pool. Bitcoind was running throughout, start p2pool, ping to 1000, stop p2pool, ping to 85 or less. I have the game on my computer too so it's just a case of spending an hour or so tweaking things a bit. I'll probably try 3/3 on the p2pool connections per the optimizing thread.

[Meuh6879]

time to change the internet box if she can't handle this "not so heavy traffic" compared to connexion on a P2P filesharing software ...   (close to 200-400 connexions per 5s)

[Meuh6879]

miners can't create reased block if ... nodes don't accept to spread.
P2P is like that.

[notbatman]

In your bitcoin.conf you can add:

"coinbase-sig" : "8MB Blocks FTW"

But does it mean For The Win or Fuck The World?

coinbase-sig seems to be a bfgminer setting

Oh yeah, it does go in miner.conf file. For p2pool it seems a bit more tricky, I found this quote:

And if you want your signature in a block, the patch to bitcoind is trivial. 

How is it done?

I use this in the binary for p2pcoin's bitcoind:

Code: (init.cpp)

    const char* pszP2PCOIN = "[P2PCOINv0]";
    COINBASE_FLAGS << std::vector<unsigned char>(pszP2PCOIN, pszP2PCOIN+strlen(pszP2PCOIN));

I also have command line options for -addtag and -addhextag that I use to add my personal tags.  They are done pretty much the same way.

[Richy_T]

time to change the internet box if she can't handle this "not so heavy traffic" compared to connexion on a P2P filesharing software ...   (close to 200-400 connexions per 5s)

I have bittorrent and it is throttled and causes no issue (unless I'm in a hurry and the cap comes off). I could try QOS on the router again but as previously stated, that caused issues with p2pool previously. Though thinking about it, that *may* have actually been a bitcoind thing (I was hashing but not getting shares).

I would consider upping the connection speed *but* it's Comcast with their craptastic 300GB cap and I'm not paying extra for exactly the same amount of data.

[Richy_T]

I've just worked out why p2pool might have been escaping my bandwidth limiting efforts. I had edited a copy of tc.sh but was still running the original. D'oh

I'll post up my version of tc.sh when done in case anyone else can use it. I'll still limit the connections though since fewer connections with more speed per is probably better than many extremely crippled ones.

[yslyung]

time to change the internet box if she can't handle this "not so heavy traffic" compared to connexion on a P2P filesharing software ...  (close to 200-400 connexions per 5s)

I have bittorrent and it is throttled and causes no issue (unless I'm in a hurry and the cap comes off). I could try QOS on the router again but as previously stated, that caused issues with p2pool previously. Though thinking about it, that *may* have actually been a bitcoind thing (I was hashing but not getting shares).

I would consider upping the connection speed *but* it's Comcast with their craptastic 300GB cap and I'm not paying extra for exactly the same amount of data.

imo if you or anyone who have "limits" should not run a pool.

p2pool don't really need such high speed/bandwidth & obviously if one have data limits it's already another limitation even to just keep a full bitcoin wallet running 24/7.

well i could be wrong but if there are speed/data limits ... don't run a pool.

stand to be corrected with my statements above.

[jonnybravo0311]

ah ha we just hit a block not not shown on my node. maybe an orphaned thing again ?

BITCOIN BLOCK FOUND by 19Crkg7yWfeC4Yp59Qxbh7XZ7E9kc9txmx

https://blockchain.info/block-index/960513/0000000000000000079322b363ff89c45d175d66600f1799567a502bd1f4ac6e


WOW

another one

BITCOIN BLOCK FOUND by 1GUWNoSCnEf1wEiMx4RCGfvmYUYNCRh589

https://blockchain.info/block/00000000000000000b89e695778c12f5438f920547eb6afa66e21c6d91c64dfe

second block was captured & recorded on my node but not the earlier block for today hmmm

Where are you seeing the address that provided the block solution?  My logs don't show that information, they simply show this:

Code:

2015-08-11 02:28:07.549738 GOT BLOCK FROM PEER! Passing to bitcoind! d1f4ac6e bitcoin: https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000079322b363ff89c45d175d66600f1799567a502bd1f4ac6e

I suppose I could evaluate the share data ... but that wouldn't work for any blocks found by dead/orphaned shares...

[Medow]

Is it possible to point p2pool pool to other pool using stratum protocol ?

I need to point a local p2pool to other pool for some purpose.

Thanks.

[Richy_T]

The issue is really with bursty applications (which bitcoind certainly is and I suspect p2pool is). It is possible to saturate a pipe, causing issues, for relatively short periods of time. Applying a little traffic shaping will often not affect things adversely but provide an improved perception of performance all-round. This is the essence of QOS. There is no point paying huge amounts of money for a smoking-fast internet connection if you are only using that speed for a dozen milliseconds every hour.

Also, many of us are on ADSL where even someone also on ADSL connecting to us can saturate our upstream whilst only taking a small fraction of their own downstream. Bandwidth management is a thing.

[yslyung]

ah ha we just hit a block not not shown on my node. maybe an orphaned thing again ?

BITCOIN BLOCK FOUND by 19Crkg7yWfeC4Yp59Qxbh7XZ7E9kc9txmx

https://blockchain.info/block-index/960513/0000000000000000079322b363ff89c45d175d66600f1799567a502bd1f4ac6e


WOW

another one

BITCOIN BLOCK FOUND by 1GUWNoSCnEf1wEiMx4RCGfvmYUYNCRh589

https://blockchain.info/block/00000000000000000b89e695778c12f5438f920547eb6afa66e21c6d91c64dfe

second block was captured & recorded on my node but not the earlier block for today hmmm

Where are you seeing the address that provided the block solution?  My logs don't show that information, they simply show this:

Code:

2015-08-11 02:28:07.549738 GOT BLOCK FROM PEER! Passing to bitcoind! d1f4ac6e bitcoin: https://blockchain.info/block/0000000000000000079322b363ff89c45d175d66600f1799567a502bd1f4ac6e

I suppose I could evaluate the share data ... but that wouldn't work for any blocks found by dead/orphaned shares...

IRC announcements

[rav3n_pl]

Is it possible to point p2pool pool to other pool using stratum protocol ?

I need to point a local p2pool to other pool for some purpose.

Thanks.

No, it is impossible. P2Pool is feed directly from bitcoind via getblocktemplate.

[p3yot33at3r]

The issue is really with bursty applications (which bitcoind certainly is and I suspect p2pool is). It is possible to saturate a pipe, causing issues, for relatively short periods of time. Applying a little traffic shaping will often not affect things adversely but provide an improved perception of performance all-round. This is the essence of QOS. There is no point paying huge amounts of money for a smoking-fast internet connection if you are only using that speed for a dozen milliseconds every hour.

Also, many of us are on ADSL where even someone also on ADSL connecting to us can saturate our upstream whilst only taking a small fraction of their own downstream. Bandwidth management is a thing.

I'm afraid you might be doing something wrong with your LAN. I too have a ADSL connection with a measly 3mb down/1 mb up bandwidth, but I am able to run a file server & a mining rig 24/7 that run 2 p2pool nodes & 15 different wallets (including 2 Bitcoin) as well as my daytime PC & a laptop without issue or bottlenecks, here is a screen of my router network usage:



...as can be seen, my usage rarely goes above 40kBs download & 34kBs upload, so running one p2pool node & one Bitcoin wallet is not a problem on even the slowest ADSL line. It's simply a case of setting maxconnections on your wallets & making sure your QOS settings are right, no changes to p2pool connections are needed - I use the standard settings. If you are still having bottleneck issues/slowdowns after checking your settings then it's time to buy a new router......

Edit: The only time you will drown your network is when you sync your wallets/p2pool (ie: restarts etc).

[Medow]

Is it possible to point p2pool pool to other pool using stratum protocol ?

I need to point a local p2pool to other pool for some purpose.

Thanks.

No, it is impossible. P2Pool is feed directly from bitcoind via getblocktemplate.

Thank you.

Do you know which pool software give the ability to point it to other pool?

[-ck]

Thank you.

Do you know which pool software give the ability to point it to other pool?

ckpool in proxy mode can be pointed at another pool or a p2pool node

[jonnybravo0311]

Pretty sure that's the basis of what nonnakip and OgNasty have done for their NastyPoP implementation.  Every miner connects to the ckpool instance, which directs to the p2pool node underneath.

[yslyung]

Pretty sure that's the basis of what nonnakip and OgNasty have done for their NastyPoP implementation.  Every miner connects to the ckpool instance, which directs to the p2pool node underneath.

but for miners far from him will have latency issues eh ?

i'm sure that's part of it & prolly he has a way to solve the latency issue ?

[kano]

Pretty sure that's the basis of what nonnakip and OgNasty have done for their NastyPoP implementation.  Every miner connects to the ckpool instance, which directs to the p2pool node underneath.

but for miners far from him will have latency issues eh ?

i'm sure that's part of it & prolly he has a way to solve the latency issue ?

Any remote p2pool node means more latency ... running centralised p2pool nodes like a lot of people do already, means people are getting more rejects than the very high rejects p2pool has by default.

With ckproxy, the added latency is dependent upon where ckproxy is and where the p2pool you are talking to is.

If you are choosing between:
a) running a local ckproxy pointing to a remote p2pool
b) mining to a remote p2pool
Latency will be pretty much the same - the problem is the choice to use a remote p2pool.

If you are choosing between:
a) mining to a ckproxy on the p2pool node
b) mining to the p2pool node
again, latency will be pretty much the same since ckproxy talking to a local p2pool is only a tiny addition to the latency

[p3yot33at3r]

Another two blocks in 24 hours......Nice!