Bitcoin Forum
September 28, 2016, 08:33:58 AM *
News: Due to DDoS attacks, there may be periodic downtime.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: What type of pool payouts do you prefer?
Bitcoins - 3151 (80.4%)
Bank transfer / USD - 407 (10.4%)
Gold/silver coins and bars - 359 (9.2%)
Total Voters: 3915

Pages: « 1 ... 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 [321] 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 ... 1104 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [40+ PH] SlushPool (slushpool.com); World's First Mining Pool  (Read 3856176 times)
deroyale
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37



View Profile WWW
April 18, 2013, 04:18:12 AM
 #6401

wtf - ddos is all they got?  Huh

         This is dumb...

Keep up the great work slush!

Criticism requires specifics capable of stimulating understanding. That's why I decided to be rude and honest.


Bitcoin is a superior medium of exchange [...] The current system is shit, designed to make slaves of people, and its [sic] the responsibility of smart people everywhere to assert an evolution.
1475051638
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475051638

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475051638
Reply with quote  #2

1475051638
Report to moderator
1475051638
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475051638

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475051638
Reply with quote  #2

1475051638
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
brekyrself
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 479


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 05:08:26 AM
 #6402

Looks like stratum is back up, thanks for the hard work!

I recently switched to your pool from BTC Guild and wouldn't mind some trusted miner program if you decide to implement.
nybbler905
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 213



View Profile
April 18, 2013, 05:10:33 AM
 #6403

Slush, you are great ! many thanks!!!

just the question... using mining_proxy-1.5.2 without any optional arguments... before APR 16 i saw access time [73ms] [78ms]... today [213ms]...[234ms]... is it important ?

not slush, and yea that is important.  you may want to open a dos shell or ubuntu ( spelling?? ) equivalent of tracert
In windows start > run > cmd ( open a DOS prompt ) and type tracert IP ( where IP is the address not the port of the server )

example window would look similar to this:

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\nybbler905>tracert stratum3.bitcoin.cz


Tracing route to stratum3.bitcoin.cz [54.214.10.134]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1     8 ms    13 ms    12 ms  [ removed in copy and paste ]
  2     8 ms     7 ms    11 ms   [ removed in copy and paste ]
  3     8 ms     7 ms     7 ms    [ removed in copy and paste ]
  4    18 ms    31 ms    23 ms  rc3wt-ge10-0-0.wa.shawcable.net [66.163.76.217]

  5    23 ms    14 ms    11 ms  paix01-sea4.amazon.com [198.32.134.41]
  6    35 ms    32 ms    21 ms  205.251.225.198
  7    21 ms    19 ms    19 ms  205.251.232.90
  8    23 ms    24 ms    24 ms  205.251.232.151



where ever there is high numbers is where the issue is and there may be nothing you can do about it after the first 2-4 ' hops ' from your pc.  The first few are your ISP's connections so you could call and complain.
try it on all 3 stratum servers since anything can actualy slow one of them and not show on the others even if they are all 3 in the same box.
Along time ago i was phone support for HP/Compaq as well as Comcast ( which blows in my opinion ) so I have seen ISPs throttling specific names causing issues.  One customer could load yahoo.ca and not yahoo.com and they both are basically in the same box as an example.

Hope this helps and on a side note GOOD WORK Slush!!! I may be CPU mining, but at least i'm not solo mining!

Always looking for donations even as low as 1uBTC
14XfpYPdtYiGoEiDcKrSzuvBM3ukhwANUh - BTC
LS7FEfu9ajp3NQcDjui9TSKscwQesj9i8k - LTC
LHe9g5ixMyfdtqAEHU5vErG1eQrDshBFRW -Luckycoin
jgm_coin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 230



View Profile
April 18, 2013, 07:08:11 AM
 #6404

Can anyone help me get the stratum-mining-proxy setup to allow outside connections go through?

Trying to use a work PC to mine and my work place has a firewall, so I thought that it might be nice if I were able to use the mining proxy to get by it.


That is potentially embezzlement; a felony in many countries.  Have fun with that....

Rent out your rig for up to 100% more than you can mine http://tinyurl.com/lc5axo2
stormos
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 43


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 09:03:01 AM
 #6405

11K shares were rewarded by 0.00000000 btc. thanks to ddos and slush's score system

17543   2013-04-17 22:22:53   11:52:18   17980185   10954   0.00000000   none   231873   25.39776000
PetrovMichael
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 36


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 09:03:49 AM
 #6406

... and yea that is important
the tracert data below

stratum.bitcoin.cz [54.214.10.101]
  1     1 ms     1 ms     1 ms  192.168.1.1 [192.168.1.1]
  2    20 ms    20 ms    20 ms  ...pool.ukrtel.net [...]
  3    20 ms    20 ms    20 ms  10.50.19.66 [10.50.19.66]
  4    81 ms    44 ms    45 ms  xe-11-0-0.bar1.Budapest1.Level3.net [212.162.26.1]
  5   212 ms   214 ms   212 ms  4.69.141.250
  6   216 ms   217 ms   217 ms  ae-93-93.csw4.Frankfurt1.Level3.net [4.69.163.14]
  7   218 ms   218 ms   217 ms  ae-91-91.ebr1.Frankfurt1.Level3.net [4.69.140.13]
  8   213 ms   214 ms   213 ms  ae-45-45.ebr2.Paris1.Level3.net [4.69.143.134]
  9   214 ms   214 ms   214 ms  ae-43-43.ebr2.Washington1.Level3.net [4.69.137.58]
 10   216 ms   217 ms   216 ms  ae-5-5.ebr2.Washington12.Level3.net [4.69.143.222]
 11   217 ms   217 ms   221 ms  ae-6-6.ebr2.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.148.146]
 12   217 ms   217 ms   217 ms  ae-1-100.ebr1.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.132.113]
 13   214 ms   217 ms   224 ms  ae-3-3.ebr2.Denver1.Level3.net [4.69.132.61]
 14   213 ms   213 ms   212 ms  ae-2-2.ebr2.Seattle1.Level3.net [4.69.132.53]
 15   390 ms   217 ms   313 ms  ae-21-52.car1.Seattle1.Level3.net [4.69.147.163]
 16   212 ms   211 ms   212 ms  AMAZON.COM.car1.Seattle1.Level3.net [4.53.144.74]
 17   211 ms   212 ms   211 ms  205.251.225.22
 18   222 ms   222 ms   240 ms  205.251.232.105
 19   225 ms   225 ms   267 ms  205.251.232.213
 20   220 ms   261 ms   226 ms  205.251.232.225
 21   218 ms   218 ms   220 ms  ec2-50-112-0-191.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [50.112.0.191]
...



stratum3.bitcoin.cz [54.214.10.134]
  1     1 ms     1 ms     1 ms  192.168.1.1 [192.168.1.1]
  2    20 ms    22 ms    20 ms  ...pool.ukrtel.net [...]
  3    21 ms    19 ms    20 ms  10.50.19.66 [10.50.19.66]
  4    41 ms    41 ms    42 ms  dialup-212.162.26.85.frankfurt1.mik.net [212.162.26.85]
 5   212 ms   211 ms   212 ms  4.69.141.250
  6   217 ms   217 ms   217 ms  ae-93-93.csw4.Frankfurt1.Level3.net [4.69.163.14]
  7   217 ms   217 ms   217 ms  ae-91-91.ebr1.Frankfurt1.Level3.net [4.69.140.13]
  8   213 ms   212 ms   212 ms  ae-45-45.ebr2.Paris1.Level3.net [4.69.143.134]
  9   213 ms   214 ms   213 ms  ae-43-43.ebr2.Washington1.Level3.net [4.69.137.58]
 10   213 ms   214 ms   214 ms  ae-5-5.ebr2.Washington12.Level3.net [4.69.143.222]
 11   215 ms   215 ms   215 ms  ae-6-6.ebr2.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.148.146]
 12   214 ms   215 ms   214 ms  ae-1-100.ebr1.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.132.113]
 13   213 ms   215 ms   212 ms  ae-3-3.ebr2.Denver1.Level3.net [4.69.132.61]
 14   210 ms   210 ms   211 ms  ae-2-2.ebr2.Seattle1.Level3.net [4.69.132.53]
 15   313 ms   251 ms   301 ms  ae-21-52.car1.Seattle1.Level3.net [4.69.147.163]
 16   209 ms   208 ms   208 ms  AMAZON.COM.car1.Seattle1.Level3.net [4.53.144.74]
 17   210 ms   210 ms   210 ms  205.251.225.20
 18   219 ms   219 ms   218 ms  205.251.232.103
 19   216 ms   216 ms   217 ms  205.251.232.207
 20   218 ms   217 ms   218 ms  205.251.232.225
 21   217 ms   215 ms   215 ms  ec2-50-112-0-191.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [50.112.0.191]
slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
April 18, 2013, 09:13:20 AM
 #6407

11K shares were rewarded by 0.00000000 btc. thanks to ddos and slush's score system

Good point, I'm going to recalculate these rounds with proportional method, which gives people more fair rewards in case of pool downtime...

slush
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile WWW
April 18, 2013, 09:25:25 AM
 #6408

just the question... using mining_proxy-1.5.2 without any optional arguments... before APR 16 i saw access time [73ms] [78ms]... today [213ms]...[234ms]... is it important ?

Good point. Servers were located in OVH/France until yesterday. I move machines to OVH from Linode after previous DDoS attacks year ago. These days,  sales representative at OVH promised me that they'll actively help me with DDoS attacks, because they have great infrastructure and skilled admins.

The reality of recent days was that they were even worse than Linode guys, because at Linode I was able to create multiple machines dynamically and mitigate DDoS by moving pool around many IPs. In OVH I had multicore machines with dozen of IPs, and I was prepared to mitigate DDoS by filtering the traffic by strong hardware and by routing traffic all around many of private IPs.

But.

These idiots at OVH blocked ALL these IPs at once since attacks started, claiming that the attack is affecting other customers. So I paid overpriced infrastructure for many months just for *nothing*. The only "solution" they offered me were Cisco firewalls, able to filter DDoS up to throughtput of 400 Mbit/s (excuse me??). When I rejected this offer, they simply rebooted my machines to "rescue mode", telling me that my servers are damaging their infrastructure and asking me to move my machines away.

So - never ever OVH.

Yesterday I migrated the pool to Amazon EC2, that's why the pool was completely offline for some time. I selected datacentres in USA, because they have the best infrastructure so far, and that's why you see higher latencies than "usual". But this is just a temporary problem, I'm configuring more machines around all Amazon datacentres (USA, Europe, Asia, ...) and I'm preparing smart routing algorithm, which will automatically move your miner to the closest pool endpoint.

I'm keeping all this very seriously, but it is hard to mitigate DDoS when you depend on group of impotent idiots at OVH which are able to send you only prefabricated template reports "your server is having issues, we restarted it / null routed all IPs".

mikesheadroom
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 69



View Profile
April 18, 2013, 09:31:57 AM
 #6409

I nominate Slush for pool operator of the year! 
Jay_Pal
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316



View Profile
April 18, 2013, 10:18:59 AM
 #6410

just the question... using mining_proxy-1.5.2 without any optional arguments... before APR 16 i saw access time [73ms] [78ms]... today [213ms]...[234ms]... is it important ?

Good point. Servers were located in OVH/France until yesterday. I move machines to OVH from Linode after previous DDoS attacks year ago. These days,  sales representative at OVH promised me that they'll actively help me with DDoS attacks, because they have great infrastructure and skilled admins.

The reality of recent days was that they were even worse than Linode guys, because at Linode I was able to create multiple machines dynamically and mitigate DDoS by moving pool around many IPs. In OVH I had multicore machines with dozen of IPs, and I was prepared to mitigate DDoS by filtering the traffic by strong hardware and by routing traffic all around many of private IPs.

But.

These idiots at OVH blocked ALL these IPs at once since attacks started, claiming that the attack is affecting other customers. So I paid overpriced infrastructure for many months just for *nothing*. The only "solution" they offered me were Cisco firewalls, able to filter DDoS up to throughtput of 400 Mbit/s (excuse me??). When I rejected this offer, they simply rebooted my machines to "rescue mode", telling me that my servers are damaging their infrastructure and asking me to move my machines away.

So - never ever OVH.

Yesterday I migrated the pool to Amazon EC2, that's why the pool was completely offline for some time. I selected datacentres in USA, because they have the best infrastructure so far, and that's why you see higher latencies than "usual". But this is just a temporary problem, I'm configuring more machines around all Amazon datacentres (USA, Europe, Asia, ...) and I'm preparing smart routing algorithm, which will automatically move your miner to the closest pool endpoint.

I'm keeping all this very seriously, but it is hard to mitigate DDoS when you depend on group of impotent idiots at OVH which are able to send you only prefabricated template reports "your server is having issues, we restarted it / null routed all IPs".

Thank you for all your effort.
Whatever this community can help, here we are to support you.

Free Coins - 🍒🍉🌼 Free Game🌼🍉🍒
BEST FAUCET EVER!!! - Don't Panic... - 1G8zjUzeZBfJpeCbz1MLTc6zQHbLm78vKc
bigb159
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 169



View Profile
April 18, 2013, 10:19:23 AM
 #6411

Thanks for getting this back up, Slush!

Now I have a minuscule amount of coin tied up in bitminter. I may have to mine there until I hit their threshold.

I've been looking around: how does one set up poclbm to fall back on a backup pool when default pool connections fail?

Trade your Litecoin, Namecoin, Terracoin, Devcoin and IXcoin for Bitcoin: Vircurex
ninjaboon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470



View Profile WWW
April 18, 2013, 10:34:13 AM
 #6412

Thanks for the info, I'll never choose OVH as my server hosting partner.

PetrovMichael
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 36


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 10:55:37 AM
 #6413

before APR 16 ... time [73ms] [78ms]... today [213ms]...[234ms]...
Good point... I'm preparing smart routing algorithm, which will automatically move your miner to the closest pool endpoint.
I'm keeping all this very seriously...

Slush, thank you ! i'm still with you, even i see when timing (the max i saw) [2108ms] (or [1748ms] or [1320ms]) share still accepted...
OlgaA524
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 54



View Profile
April 18, 2013, 12:04:14 PM
 #6414

Thank you for your tremendous efforts Slush! get some rest Smiley

18rWR6S4onARe8AQ1RgG4iGWKas3R97k4T - donations are most welcome
tnkflx
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 346


View Profile
April 18, 2013, 01:08:50 PM
 #6415

just the question... using mining_proxy-1.5.2 without any optional arguments... before APR 16 i saw access time [73ms] [78ms]... today [213ms]...[234ms]... is it important ?

Good point. Servers were located in OVH/France until yesterday. I move machines to OVH from Linode after previous DDoS attacks year ago. These days,  sales representative at OVH promised me that they'll actively help me with DDoS attacks, because they have great infrastructure and skilled admins.

The reality of recent days was that they were even worse than Linode guys, because at Linode I was able to create multiple machines dynamically and mitigate DDoS by moving pool around many IPs. In OVH I had multicore machines with dozen of IPs, and I was prepared to mitigate DDoS by filtering the traffic by strong hardware and by routing traffic all around many of private IPs.

But.

These idiots at OVH blocked ALL these IPs at once since attacks started, claiming that the attack is affecting other customers. So I paid overpriced infrastructure for many months just for *nothing*. The only "solution" they offered me were Cisco firewalls, able to filter DDoS up to throughtput of 400 Mbit/s (excuse me??). When I rejected this offer, they simply rebooted my machines to "rescue mode", telling me that my servers are damaging their infrastructure and asking me to move my machines away.

So - never ever OVH.

Yesterday I migrated the pool to Amazon EC2, that's why the pool was completely offline for some time. I selected datacentres in USA, because they have the best infrastructure so far, and that's why you see higher latencies than "usual". But this is just a temporary problem, I'm configuring more machines around all Amazon datacentres (USA, Europe, Asia, ...) and I'm preparing smart routing algorithm, which will automatically move your miner to the closest pool endpoint.

I'm keeping all this very seriously, but it is hard to mitigate DDoS when you depend on group of impotent idiots at OVH which are able to send you only prefabricated template reports "your server is having issues, we restarted it / null routed all IPs".

Is cloudfare a viable solution?

| Operating electrum.be & us.electrum.be |
tarrant_01
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546



View Profile
April 18, 2013, 01:20:51 PM
 #6416

I noticed that I am getting the message that some of my workers are using the deprecated "getwork" protocol but all my workers are using cgminer 2.11.3 (one down from the current 2.11.4).  The message suggests that I use cgminer 2.8.x or higher.  What else could be wrong?

1P95gCUCw3Tjb7yyoYtW3ARZZQyTpFgk6H
DoomDumas
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784


Bitcoin forever !


View Profile WWW
April 18, 2013, 01:24:10 PM
 #6417

I nominate Slush for pool operator of the year! 

I vote for Slush !

Keep up the excellent work, and updating user like you do is really really appreciated.. I'll always mine on Slush's pool !

Soap for BTC - Pure, Natural, Unique..   - PDF - BTCTalk - Email
Hippie Tech
aka Amenstop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


www.occupationmovie.com


View Profile WWW
April 18, 2013, 01:31:06 PM
 #6418

Very suspicious behaviour by OVH. I smell a false flag.

Demand a refund in BTC !!

mcdougrs
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 15



View Profile WWW
April 18, 2013, 02:32:23 PM
 #6419

That is potentially embezzlement; a felony in many countries.  Have fun with that....
Not if I have permission.

If you haven't yet try out http://www.bitvisitor.com/?ref=1Et6ktab6inEtoQ7xJv9roSpF3fQdF4Fcv (http://www.bitvisitor.com/?ref=1Et6ktab6inEtoQ7xJv9roSpF3fQdF4Fcv) for some free mBTC everyday
Synapse_On_Slush
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 22



View Profile
April 18, 2013, 02:50:52 PM
 #6420

Since the DDoS I've had problems getting my 7970 ATI mining backup to it's ~614 MH/s I had using GUIMiner with cgminer.exe on stratum.

I can't remember how I got cgminer.exe working with GUIMiner, when I try to add it now it says that cgminer.exe is not supported and refuses. Very confused as I've not updated since January 2013 and it obviously allowed me to add it back then...

Anyway, my problem is - I'v now tried just going with cgminer.exe straight from command line but I'm only getting 575 MH/s... Any idea why it's slower going direct with cgminer than using it through GUIMiner?

I've had to use cgminer directly as GUIMiner has (apparently) started using getwork (according to my slush pool account page). I tried telling guiminer the stratum.bitcoin.cz with port 3333 but it just kept saying "starting..." and nothing more. So I figure GUIMiner is temporarily broken/forced to using getwork so I'll use the (confusigly) slower cgminer.exe direct from command line.

Anyone else noticed this? or am I just odd having been using GUIMiner to run cgminer.exe all this time? :/
It was definitely using stratum before the DDoS.

0.000002 BTC welcome Wink
1JvyTsJ8cFGNszyQMCJNDM2rKEGVU4xSAa
Pages: « 1 ... 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 [321] 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 ... 1104 »
  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!