Bottlecaps 2.1 UPDATE REQUIRED - HARDFORK JULY 4 2014 to 200% Annual PoS

[butjust41day]

Yes I deleted everything except for the wallet.dat and the conf file. The addnodes were those listed above. When I hit the seven days left mark the download kept hanging.

Edit:

Downloading again using only one addnode 50.137.233.14

Will see what I get and may try each node individually.

[flound1129]

199.180.115.100

50.137.233.14

Still on the right chain looking into it more now

Well I'm not getting the chain I was on earlier in the day, I had confirmed transactions to cryptsy up till 2 hours ago, the new chain I downloaded is all orphans back to 2.5 days ago.

What is the block height of the chain you are on? If it does not match the explorer here http://bottlecaps.kicks-ass.net/block_crawler.php

You are not on the right chain. When I checked last night multipool was on the correct chain.

Unless there is a new fork that just occured 2.5 days ago that you just switched over too, when you get on the correct chain the tx's  from the last 2.5 days should be valid

Ill be working on 1.4.1 and wont stop until it is finished

It looks right now..  My balance is back.

[mullick]

Okay using the addnodes listed above I downloaded the same block chain I was on before; but, both block explorers can't locate the transactions for what I mined this afternoon. Currently it shows the current block as 65853. So if I used the "trusted nodes"  and still ended up on the wrong chain how is that possible?

If you were on the wrong chain when you were mining sadly they will be lost. You prob received a larger number of blocks because the difficulty on that chain was extremely low

Sorry for the inconvience

If the coins were mined on the correct chain but sent when you were on the wrong one they should have gone through when you synced to the correct chain

[butjust41day]

Okay using the addnodes listed above I downloaded the same block chain I was on before; but, both block explorers can't locate the transactions for what I mined this afternoon. Currently it shows the current block as 65853. So if I used the "trusted nodes"  and still ended up on the wrong chain how is that possible?

If you were on the wrong chain when you were mining sadly they will be lost. You prob received a larger number of blocks because the difficulty on that chain was extremely low

Sorry for the inconvience

If the coins were mined on the correct chain but sent when you were on the wrong one they should have gone through when you synced to the correct chain

Well here's my mining info when using only addnode= 50.137.233.14   I did not include any other addnodes because you specified that this node is definitely on the right chain. I did delete everything except for the wallet and the .conf:

{
"blocks" : 65908,
"currentblocksize" : 0,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 0.33298613,
"errors" : "WARNING: Checkpoint is too old. Redownload Blockchain. If warning persist contact the Development Team",
"generate" : false,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 0,
"pooledtx" : 0,
"testnet" : false
}

So apparently the trusted node is on my current chain or at the least directing my wallet to download from that chain. And yes I did get alot of blocks 

[mullick]

Okay using the addnodes listed above I downloaded the same block chain I was on before; but, both block explorers can't locate the transactions for what I mined this afternoon. Currently it shows the current block as 65853. So if I used the "trusted nodes"  and still ended up on the wrong chain how is that possible?

If you were on the wrong chain when you were mining sadly they will be lost. You prob received a larger number of blocks because the difficulty on that chain was extremely low

Sorry for the inconvience

If the coins were mined on the correct chain but sent when you were on the wrong one they should have gone through when you synced to the correct chain

Well here's my mining info when using only addnode= 50.137.233.14   I did not include any other addnodes because you specified that this node is definitely on the right chain. I did delete everything except for the wallet and the .conf:

{
"blocks" : 65908,
"currentblocksize" : 0,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 0.33298613,
"errors" : "WARNING: Checkpoint is too old. Redownload Blockchain. If warning persist contact the Development Team",
"generate" : false,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 0,
"pooledtx" : 0,
"testnet" : false
}

So apparently the trusted node is on my current chain or at the least directing my wallet to download from that chain. And yes I did get alot of blocks  

Sadly the number of connections on the wrong chain outwieghed the node you added. try connect= "any of the nodes in the OP"

That will get you directly connected and downloading from that node. Ill have more info shortly working on 1.4.1

Also try getpeerinfo if you cannot connect to those nodes. Any peer stating protocol 60008 and a starting height close to the correct chain height is a good node to add for now

You could even add it as connect= to download directly from them

More good nodes:



[
{
"addr" : "70.98.114.237:7685",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1376017638,
"lastrecv" : 1376017643,
"conntime" : 1376017600,
"version" : 60008,
"subver" : "/Satoshi:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 66084,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "115.76.32.246:7685",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1376017643,
"lastrecv" : 1376017643,
"conntime" : 1376017607,
"version" : 60008,
"subver" : "/Satoshi:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 66084,
"banscore" : 0
},
{
"addr" : "192.241.222.16:7685",
"services" : "00000001",
"lastsend" : 1376017637,
"lastrecv" : 1376017639,
"conntime" : 1376017635,
"version" : 60008,
"subver" : "/Satoshi:0.7.2/",
"inbound" : false,
"releasetime" : 0,
"startingheight" : 66084,
"banscore" : 0
}
]

[butjust41day]

Well I only tried using the single node after using the nodes from the original post also gave me the wrong chain. In fact I've used all the nodes listed recently here as well as the new node "a kind soul has setup". I correctly deleted everything each time. I cannot download the "correct" chain with the nodes provided. I'm not a novice here I have successfully mined various coins without many problems. I've mined a lot of CAP as well; but, have been set back several times because of the various recommended addnodes that caused problems.

At this point it's time for bed. I have pointed my miners else where for the time being.

I'll try the nodes you've added directly above tomorrow.

[paulsltc123]

Well..my client/wallet is on the correct chain.
1. Is that the only/best way to confirm this is by confirming the block height?

2. And how does this all happen btw?
3. What causes random forks like this? I was on Erundook's Epools the past couple of days and I guess sometime today around lunch is when it went astray...I did think the lowered difficulty meant something was up.
4. Is seeing a low difficulty the main way of telling if a pool has gone down the wrong part of the chain? How can one find out if the pool they are on is correct?

Thanks for any help and/or clarity on this.

I guess for now I will await the 1.4.1 update and for all pools to get back on track before connecting back onto Caps again..

[mullick]

1.4.1 is nearly complete A kind user has created an installer to install a .conf file to prevent any node errors all nodes are verified operational and on the correct chain. Finishing up a few more things in the morning and release will be within 24 hours

[ISAWHIM]

I assume I am on the correct chain... no orphans...

Diff-level: 73K in the miner (1.11 scrypt)
Block-height: 66528 @ 6:39 AM (GMT -5) : 11:39 AM (GMT)
Same as: Coinchoose.com

Connections: (from my config list.)
70.98.114.229 (version 60008) {This is the only one that ever talks, from the list}

Connections: (not in list. trust at own risk...)
50.2.8.67 (version 60008)
78.31.105.38 (version 60006) *** v 60006?
106.187.100.78 (version 60008)
54.252.196.5 (version 60008)
67.167.228.42 (version 60008)
115.76.32.246 (version 60008)
92.5.104.42 (version 60008)

My config settings... (Had to remove two of the IP's previously set as trusted, for them feeding bad data.)

splash=0
server=1
gen=0
testnet=0
daemon=1
maxconnections=10
listen=1

addnode=186.95.162.209
addnode=70.98.114.229
addnode=188.165.211.65
addnode=199.192.205.46
addnode=176.34.210.88
addnode=70.69.238.84
addnode=70.98.114.237

[mullick]

I assume I am on the correct chain... no orphans...

Diff-level: 73K in the miner (1.11 scrypt)
Block-height: 66528 @ 6:39 AM (GMT -5) : 11:39 AM (GMT)
Same as: Coinchoose.com

Connections: (from my config list.)
70.98.114.229 (version 60008) {This is the only one that ever talks, from the list}

Connections: (not in list. trust at own risk...)
50.2.8.67 (version 60008)
78.31.105.38 (version 60006) *** v 60006?
106.187.100.78 (version 60008)
54.252.196.5 (version 60008)
67.167.228.42 (version 60008)
115.76.32.246 (version 60008)
92.5.104.42 (version 60008)

My config settings... (Had to remove two of the IP's previously set as trusted, for them feeding bad data.)

splash=0
server=1
gen=0
testnet=0
daemon=1
maxconnections=10
listen=1

addnode=186.95.162.209
addnode=70.98.114.229
addnode=188.165.211.65
addnode=199.192.205.46
addnode=176.34.210.88
addnode=70.69.238.84
addnode=70.98.114.237

Yep you are with the rest of us

epools got a odd error, disconnected from its node then started its own chain today looking into the cause of that currently as well

[Petr1fied]

92.5.104.42 (version 60008)

That peer is me, the state of which can be viewed here. I'm typically connected to 40+ peers and since the last major issue I've remained on the authoritative chain.

[BitJohn]

I donated a bunch of coin to the faucet so go get a sip.

http://bottlecaps.kicks-ass.net/

[lemons]

I delete old file and reldownload .

WAENING:Checkpoint is too old.Redownload Blockchain. If warning persist contact the Development Team.

 

[BitJohn]

I delete old file and reldownload .

WAENING:Checkpoint is too old.Redownload Blockchain. If warning persist contact the Development Team.

 

That is normal and not a bad thing its normal for PoS coins. They will add checkpoints in the next release.

[Spoetnik]

ya i tried this update and it said that checkpoint message for me too..

i was going to try some more mining for caps again (i sold what i had a while back)
but i looked at the numbers + my lowhash rate and im not sure there is any point
so the faucet means thanks for donating to keep it going BitJohn (not sure who started it but thanks to them too)

[mullick]

Proposed changes to 1.4.1 have been uploaded to the development branch on github for peer review.   https://github.com/bottlecaps-foundation/bottlecaps/tree/Development-Branch-(-Open-Testing-)

After much frustration and many possibilities reviewed Here is how I have decided to proceed with shaking the dodgy peers and forks which are still being kept alive with little hashrate due to the difficulty algorithm

1.4.1 Change log:

* added multiple checkpoint to get clients on the right path.
* added protocol changes to disconnect any client previous to 1.4.1 at block 77500 Approx. 7 days from when I coded the changes
* Added irc changes to create a new IRC channel at block 77500 when all outdated clients disconnect. Just in case
* New windows installer.exe which will install a pre configured .conf file with all dedicated nodes we have setup
* Not really a code change but setting up a total of 6 dedicated nodes Located in AUS,  South america, Canada, Bulgaria and USA to speed up and help blocks propagate between peers. All running close to 50 connections on high speed networks. Keep in mind some are not free. Any expenses for this will come out of the Foundations donation fund and our pockets since there was no pre / instamine


These changes may seem drastic but we cannot allow the network to continue functioning like this. This will be a Mandatory update once again. If you are not updated by block 77500 you will likely be left on a forked chain. As you will not be able to communicate with the rest of the network running version 1.4.1

This will get rid of all bad nodes we have been seeing recently throwing clients out of sync and preventing proper chain downloading

 Release is scheduled for 8/10/2013 around midnight forum time. Ensuring enough time for our nodes to gain connections and prove reliability. As well as giving the community time to review the changes. As I have been working on this for quite some time and may have gone nuts during the process. Although I believe all changes will take effect.

The changes updated to the development branch are in no way final as I have had no time to fully test or even compile a client. I will do this all in the morning and get the client released when I am finished. It is just more to give users an idea of changes to be implemented and gain feedback for a short time prior to release

We will be doing giveaways for users providing proof of the upgrade ect to make sure as many users are aware of the update and are not left behind at block 77500.

If all goes well and we can achieve 1 week of stability in the chain we will then continue with out previous development path located here

https://cryptocointalk.com/blog/7/entry-22-the-bottlecaps-foundation-30-day-user-update/

If you would like to setup a node please contact me with details and for any help setting up

[Ephebus]

* New windows installer.exe which will install a pre configured .conf file with all dedicated nodes we have setup

You gotta be careful with this so the installer won't mess up user settings like rpcuser, rpcpassword, rpcallowip, rpcport, etc. Also, don't forget that XP and 7 use a different directory path for user settings. Personally, I'm against installers making any changes to my configuration files.

[mullick]

* New windows installer.exe which will install a pre configured .conf file with all dedicated nodes we have setup

You gotta be careful with this so the installer won't mess up user settings like rpcuser, rpcpassword, rpcallowip, rpcport, etc. Also, don't forget that XP and 7 use a different directory path for user settings. Personally, I'm against installers making any changes to my configuration files.

Thank you I will include a warning for the installers. There will be separate installers for XP and Vista/7/8 and of course these will be optional there will always we a stand alone QT provided

[SpaceCadet]

* New windows installer.exe which will install a pre configured .conf file with all dedicated nodes we have setup

You gotta be careful with this so the installer won't mess up user settings like rpcuser, rpcpassword, rpcallowip, rpcport, etc. Also, don't forget that XP and 7 use a different directory path for user settings. Personally, I'm against installers making any changes to my configuration files.

Thank you I will include a warning for the installers. There will be separate installers for XP and Vista/7/8 and of course these will be optional there will always we a stand alone QT provided

You might try testing for the existence of an config file; if found, then rename it (.conf.old or .conf.org) so the user can copy any personal settings from it to your new file (if they have personal settings, they should be savi enough to manage that on their own)...

[mullick]

* New windows installer.exe which will install a pre configured .conf file with all dedicated nodes we have setup

You gotta be careful with this so the installer won't mess up user settings like rpcuser, rpcpassword, rpcallowip, rpcport, etc. Also, don't forget that XP and 7 use a different directory path for user settings. Personally, I'm against installers making any changes to my configuration files.

Thank you I will include a warning for the installers. There will be separate installers for XP and Vista/7/8 and of course these will be optional there will always we a stand alone QT provided

You might try testing for the existence of an config file; if found, then rename it (.conf.old or .conf.org) so the user can copy any personal settings from it to your new file (if they have personal settings, they should be savi enough to manage that on their own)...

Ill ask about that. I personally will not be doing the Windows installer. But will make sure the dev working on it takes a look