kano
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
 |
August 19, 2015, 07:14:35 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lucko
|
|
August 19, 2015, 07:31:35 AM
Last edit: August 19, 2015, 10:03:16 AM by Lucko |
|
I was DOS from TOR to and I would guess this s temporally. If QT's are assholes that is the only defence. And as far as I know that will change and will be based on number of request from IP and this is just a quick fix... Read mailing list... And my mistake. We can't say it was a XT block. It could be BIP 101 block... EDIT: Just looked at the code. What BS. It just uses a list that deprioritized a list of IPs that get dropped if you are DOS attack. And I do see a lot of IPs in the list that were DOSing me... So to say it is a blocking list... I got about 75% of that IPs in days and they are saying it took mouths to map... Real FUD... So I no longer need DROP rules in FW... That makes things batter for TOR not worst... They can now connect and only get drooped if I get DOS again... EDIT2: It could be called same as pools and nodes doping so called SPAM in SPAM attack. There was a lot of valid ones in there... I know for at lest one since I was affected. But that was all good right? Since you agree that this is SPAM even if it is not... EDIT3: I'm not sure but are they looking a different code or I'm missing something... Most of the issue had code from months ago not this one... and I think that someone agrees with me http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010388.html Someone jumped too soon... PR war and lies |
|
|
|
|
|
pekatete
|
|
August 19, 2015, 09:51:52 AM
Last edit: August 19, 2015, 10:08:41 AM by pekatete |
|
could other pool admins stop spamming slush's thread with off-topic musings trying to lure miners by splitting hairs please?
|
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
August 19, 2015, 12:52:00 PM |
|
could other pool admins stop spamming slush's thread with off-topic musings trying to lure miners by splitting hairs please?
Yeah I agree, that's why I'm only posting on topic comments here. Take note of that next time you feel like posting in my pool thread  |
|
|
|
|
pekatete
|
|
August 19, 2015, 12:56:15 PM |
|
could other pool admins stop spamming slush's thread with off-topic musings trying to lure miners by splitting hairs please?
Yeah I agree, that's why I'm only posting on topic comments here. Take note of that next time you feel like posting in my pool thread Stop spamming this thread with your off-topic debate about what is alt and not. You saying it is on-topic is simply burying your pokey hed in the sand. you want o carry on that debate, take it to your self moderated pool thread (where your nonsense prevails over reason). And by the way, you do not have any pool thread seeing this is a public forum, simply a self moderated thread (as in you can delete whatever comment does not suit your narrow-mindedness, in your case). |
|
|
|
kano
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4634
Merit: 1851
Linux since 1997 RedHat 4
|
|
August 19, 2015, 12:57:08 PM |
|
could other pool admins stop spamming slush's thread with off-topic musings trying to lure miners by splitting hairs please?
Yeah I agree, that's why I'm only posting on topic comments here. Take note of that next time you feel like posting in my pool thread Stop spamming this thread with your off-topic debate about what is alt and not. You saying it is on-topic is simply burying your pokey hed in the sand. And by the way, you do not have any pool thread seeing this is a public forum, simply a self moderated thread (as in you can delete whatever comment does not suit your narrow-mindedness, in your case). Thanks |
|
|
|
|
pekatete
|
|
August 19, 2015, 01:04:43 PM |
|
Thanks Do not feel obliged to respond as you only exercebate the spamming with that typically nonsensical response. And while at it, get a life! Thank YOU. In the meantime .... slush (the 15PH + pool) is on a bit of a roll today, eh!? |
|
|
|
Gyrsur
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2856
Merit: 1520
Bitcoin Legal Tender Countries: 2 of 206
|
|
August 19, 2015, 03:45:18 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TheRealSteve
|
|
August 19, 2015, 03:58:08 PM |
|
For those who inexplicably missed it: that's the first, and so far only, block that has its version number set to 536870919 (or 0x20000007 in hex) [1]. That number, in binary, sets a specific set of bits that signals to Bitcoin XT [2] that the block should count as vote in favor of a block size increase [3] as specified in BIP101 [4]. Slush announced on facebook that they will be supporting both Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT as choices for miners [5]. |
|
|
|
Gyrsur
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2856
Merit: 1520
Bitcoin Legal Tender Countries: 2 of 206
|
|
August 19, 2015, 04:15:07 PM
Last edit: August 19, 2015, 04:56:20 PM by Gyrsur |
|
For those who inexplicably missed it: that's the first, and so far only, block that has its version number set to 536870919 (or 0x20000007 in hex) [1]. That number, in binary, sets a specific set of bits that signals to Bitcoin XT [2] that the block should count as vote in favor of a block size increase [3] as specified in BIP101 [4]. Slush announced on facebook that they will be supporting both Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT as choices for miners [5]. BS so far and nothing like a prove. where is the hex in the code? EDIT: it's true. slush's pool mined the first XT block! such a shame! /** Blocks with version fields that have these bits set activate the bigger-block fork */
const unsigned int SIZE_FORK_VERSION = 0x20000007;
|
|
|
|
|
KNK
|
|
August 19, 2015, 05:15:11 PM |
|
Slush announced on facebook that they will be supporting both Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin XT as choices for miners [5]. Since tomorrow you'll be able to vote for or vote against this proposal on Slush Pool directly with your miners. Stay tuned! But it doesn't say how do we vote, yet there is a 'voting block' for XT, which I am personally against. I am sure we will have that option with the next pool update and this is probably just a test for it. EDIT: it's true. slush's pool mined the first XT block! such a shame! Slush was the first pool ever, first to implement Stratum and now the first pool implementing XT as an option. All will be fine quite soon (see above), so it's not a shame, but just another first for Slush. |
|
|
|
Gyrsur
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2856
Merit: 1520
Bitcoin Legal Tender Countries: 2 of 206
|
|
August 19, 2015, 05:31:46 PM |
|
EDIT: it's true. slush's pool mined the first XT block! such a shame! Slush was the first pool ever, first to implement Stratum and now the first pool implementing XT as an option. All will be fine quite soon (see above), so it's not a shame, but just another first for Slush. I don't want to be a part of these which mine XT blocks but I did not have a choice! Such a shame! |
|
|
|
Adrian-x
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 19, 2015, 06:10:48 PM |
|
I was DOS from TOR to and I would guess this s temporally. If QT's are assholes that is the only defence. And as far as I know that will change and will be based on number of request from IP and this is just a quick fix... Read mailing list... And my mistake. We can't say it was a XT block. It could be BIP 101 block... EDIT: Just looked at the code. What BS. It just uses a list that deprioritized a list of IPs that get dropped if you are DOS attack. And I do see a lot of IPs in the list that were DOSing me... So to say it is a blocking list... I got about 75% of that IPs in days and they are saying it took mouths to map... Real FUD... So I no longer need DROP rules in FW... That makes things batter for TOR not worst... They can now connect and only get drooped if I get DOS again... EDIT2: It could be called same as pools and nodes doping so called SPAM in SPAM attack. There was a lot of valid ones in there... I know for at lest one since I was affected. But that was all good right? Since you agree that this is SPAM even if it is not... EDIT3: I'm not sure but are they looking a different code or I'm missing something... Most of the issue had code from months ago not this one... and I think that someone agrees with me http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-August/010388.html Someone jumped too soon... PR war and lies thanks for that, that's what we are talking about BIP101, I dont care what software nodes use, XT means nothing, it sounds like an ALT and Mikes branding makes it look like one too, I'm sure its just a PR thing. (even got a PM from r/nullc gloating over their victory.) It's in the general interest of bitcoiners and those that benefit from better money in the future that we are free to make chooses and discuss them, I want to mine blocks that will support BIP101. - unfortunately Bitcoin XT is off topic precisely because it is the only option with a footprint in the Bitcoin space that runs the BIP101 improvement. calling it an alt is ridiculous. actually came here to say nice run on luck there :-) - lets change the OP subject line too. (16.42 Ph/s) |
Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
|
|
|
|
TheRealSteve
|
|
August 19, 2015, 06:16:10 PM |
|
I'd guess they just had to make sure putting that version on actually worked in a live environment before throwing it out there as an option. Just a guess, though. All blocks from Slush since (so far) have been version 3 (regular Core version).
|
|
|
|
|
KNK
|
|
August 19, 2015, 07:05:04 PM |
|
I don't want to be a part of these which mine XT blocks but I did not have a choice! Such a shame!
Me too, but please read again my full post and specifically the part you have removed from your quote. I'd guess they just had to make sure putting that version on actually worked in a live environment before throwing it out there as an option. Just a guess, though. All blocks from Slush since (so far) have been version 3 (regular Core version).
That's exactly what I meant in my post - this block is just a test and we will have the option to vote pretty soon. |
|
|
|
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1024
Mine at Jonny's Pool
|
|
August 19, 2015, 07:16:08 PM |
|
What do you mean it was a test? You want to perform a test, you throw it up on the test network. What was done here was slush actively pointing miner hash rate to an XT node which constructed and solved a block. There is no announcement on the website stating that this would occur. Perhaps this was announced in some social media, but it isn't anywhere on the actual website. Therefore, miners weren't given the choice - it was made for them.
Of course, if you did indeed happen to know in advance that this was going to occur, and you chose to keep your miners here, then you voted for XT by default. If you have become aware of this, and continue to mine here, you are indeed voting for XT. I wonder if you're going to be given the option in your worker setup or somewhere else (like a different URL/port) to choose XT or Core, or if slush will solely mine on XT nodes.
|
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.
|
|
|
|
pekatete
|
|
August 19, 2015, 07:23:32 PM |
|
As time goes by, it seems more people are voting with their hash for XT (pool hash-rate was approx 14PH yesterday and it is now approx 16PH and growing!).
And yes, the "test" was done without informing pool users, and most likely the announcement to offer the choice to vote for XT was made after the "test", but more important is that the choice is to be offered (and pertinently that the pool hash seems to be growing as the news spreads and the importance of the "test" sinks in).
|
|
|
|
|
TheRealSteve
|
|
August 19, 2015, 09:22:43 PM |
|
Right now, every Slush Pool miner can vote for larger blocksize.
Simply use one of following mining URL to do so:
stratum+tcp://stratum.bitcoin.cz:3301
stratum+tcp://us-east.stratum.bitcoin.cz:3301
stratum+tcp://eu.stratum.bitcoin.cz:3301
( only difference is the port ) |
|
|
|
|
Lucko
|
|
August 20, 2015, 12:09:23 AM |
|
Right now, every Slush Pool miner can vote for larger blocksize.
Simply use one of following mining URL to do so:
stratum+tcp://stratum.bitcoin.cz:3301
stratum+tcp://us-east.stratum.bitcoin.cz:3301
stratum+tcp://eu.stratum.bitcoin.cz:3301
( only difference is the port ) Now I need to change ports on 33 miners... He didn't make it easy... |
|
|
|
|
edonkey
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1150
Merit: 1004
|
|
August 20, 2015, 02:54:26 AM |
|
Right now, every Slush Pool miner can vote for larger blocksize.
Simply use one of following mining URL to do so:
stratum+tcp://stratum.bitcoin.cz:3301
stratum+tcp://us-east.stratum.bitcoin.cz:3301
stratum+tcp://eu.stratum.bitcoin.cz:3301
( only difference is the port ) Now I need to change ports on 33 miners... He didn't make it easy... Seems like an alternative set of URLs is the only way to realistically implement a voting system. If they made it account based (for example) then there would be overhead forwarding mining traffic to the appropriate stratum server. I switched my miners over this afternoon, as soon as I heard about it. I think the option to vote with your hash power is inspired. Well done Slush! |
Was I helpful? BTC: 3G1Ubof5u8K9iJkM8We2f3amYZgGVdvpHr
|
|
|
|
