p2pool deposits to cryptsy - why not?

[mberg2007]

"Notice: Do NOT use p2pool to deposit directly to your Cryptsy wallets, as it will not show the address in our wallet and we will be unable to credit your account."

Does anyone know the technical reason for this?

I always understood cryptocoins as a public ledger that would show each transaction. How can p2pool "not show" its address? If a transaction has my account as the end point, why are they not able to process that transaction?

-Michael

[1715263690]

1715263690

[1715263690]

1715263690

[grue]

probably because the transaction shows as "generated" rather than a normal transaction.

[mberg2007]

probably because the transaction shows as "generated" rather than a normal transaction.

When is a transaction not "generated"? All transactions are generated somehow.

And what is the problem with generated transactions that make them impossible to process? If someone was mining directly to my private wallet, it wouldn't be a problem would it?

-Michael

[ZirconiumX]

probably because the transaction shows as "generated" rather than a normal transaction.

When is a transaction not "generated"? All transactions are generated somehow.

And what is the problem with generated transactions that make them impossible to process? If someone was mining directly to my private wallet, it wouldn't be a problem would it?

-Michael

The fact that generated transactions come from thin air. Cryptsy's software doesn't accept transactions that come from the address 0. So you have to move them manually.

Matthew:out

[mberg2007]

The fact that generated transactions come from thin air. Cryptsy's software doesn't accept transactions that come from the address 0. So you have to move them manually.

I didn't realize this. I thought a transaction was a record consisting of at least:

A) A recipient
B) A sender
C) An amount

The key for this record is the transaction ID.

Which part of this do you say is "0"? If you mean the sender is 0, how is this possible? And if so can't I just create a transaction that sends 10000 BTC to me from sender 0, and get 10000 BTC for free?

Or do you mean the Tx id is 0, and if so why would a pool be generating transactions with a zero txid if this is causing problems with exchanges?

I'm sure there's something I am missing here :-)

-Michael

[grue]

The fact that generated transactions come from thin air. Cryptsy's software doesn't accept transactions that come from the address 0. So you have to move them manually.

I didn't realize this. I thought a transaction was a record consisting of at least:

A) A recipient
B) A sender
C) An amount

The key for this record is the transaction ID.

Which part of this do you say is "0"? If you mean the sender is 0, how is this possible? And if so can't I just create a transaction that sends 10000 BTC to me from sender 0, and get 10000 BTC for free?

Or do you mean the Tx id is 0, and if so why would a pool be generating transactions with a zero txid if this is causing problems with exchanges?

I'm sure there's something I am missing here :-)

-Michael

All of this is speculation, of course. No one knows how cryptsy's software works. If you really wanted to know the reason, email the administrator. Otherwise, follow the site's instructions and don't deposit using p2pool.

[ZirconiumX]

The fact that generated transactions come from thin air. Cryptsy's software doesn't accept transactions that come from the address 0. So you have to move them manually.

I didn't realize this. I thought a transaction was a record consisting of at least:

A) A recipient
B) A sender
C) An amount

The key for this record is the transaction ID.

Which part of this do you say is "0"? If you mean the sender is 0, how is this possible? And if so can't I just create a transaction that sends 10000 BTC to me from sender 0, and get 10000 BTC for free?

Or do you mean the Tx id is 0, and if so why would a pool be generating transactions with a zero txid if this is causing problems with exchanges?

I'm sure there's something I am missing here :-)

-Michael

The sender.  You can't create a transaction like that because 0 is not a valid address in any kind of coin. The fact that it comes from an invalid address confuses the software.

Grue is right, though, this is just speculation.

Whatever the reason is, don't try it. Warnings are usually there for good reasons.

Matthew:out

[mberg2007]

The sender.  You can't create a transaction like that because 0 is not a valid address in any kind of coin. The fact that it comes from an invalid address confuses the software.

How can a bitcoin address be "invalid"? Why would the mining pool operator create a transaction with an invalid sender address? Would it in fact not be much easier to just use my wallet address at the mining pool in question?

Grue is right, though, this is just speculation.

Whatever the reason is, don't try it. Warnings are usually there for good reasons.

I'm trying to find out what the reason is. Why? Because it kind of shatters my understanding of what bitcoin is and what it can do. If it is possible to create a certain kind of transaction that is somehow "not trustworthy" compared to other transactions then the entire system is flawed isn't it. The whole point of bitcoin is that the encryption of the public ledger provides anonymity and security, yet apparently there are transactions that should not be trusted. This bothers me.

-Michael

[grue]

I'm trying to find out what the reason is. Why? Because it kind of shatters my understanding of what bitcoin is and what it can do. If it is possible to create a certain kind of transaction that is somehow "not trustworthy" compared to other transactions then the entire system is flawed isn't it. The whole point of bitcoin is that the encryption of the public ledger provides anonymity and security, yet apparently there are transactions that should not be trusted. This bothers me.

-Michael

Here's my final piece of speculation: "generated" transactions are dependent on the block being valid (as in, part of the longest chain). If there is a fork, then that transaction will no longer be vaild, and cryptsy will lose the deposit. This may not be a problem with bitcoin, but this can be an issue with fast block alt-coins. Again, this is speculation. If you want definitive answer, I encourage you to email the exchange administrator.

[frankenmint]

The sender.  You can't create a transaction like that because 0 is not a valid address in any kind of coin. The fact that it comes from an invalid address confuses the software.

How can a bitcoin address be "invalid"? Why would the mining pool operator create a transaction with an invalid sender address? Would it in fact not be much easier to just use my wallet address at the mining pool in question?

Grue is right, though, this is just speculation.

Whatever the reason is, don't try it. Warnings are usually there for good reasons.

I'm trying to find out what the reason is. Why? Because it kind of shatters my understanding of what bitcoin is and what it can do. If it is possible to create a certain kind of transaction that is somehow "not trustworthy" compared to other transactions then the entire system is flawed isn't it. The whole point of bitcoin is that the encryption of the public ledger provides anonymity and security, yet apparently there are transactions that should not be trusted. This bothers me.

-Michael

This page has all the technical goodness you could ever want http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3626/what-is-the-p2pool

obviously everyone has hit the nail on the head that you are generating a proportional share of mined earnings from a generated block - the block comes from thin air.  I would gather that as a method to prevent sabatoge on their system...funds can only be received from valid addresses...not thin air.

http://builtwith.com/cryptsy.com  also has what software is at least detected in use on their site

[mberg2007]

obviously everyone has hit the nail on the head that you are generating a proportional share of mined earnings from a generated block - the block comes from thin air.  I would gather that as a method to prevent sabatoge on their system...funds can only be received from valid addresses...not thin air.

I'm sorry but this makes no sense at all.

How is it I can send p2pool mined funds to myself (and spend it immediately), but sending the exact same mined funds to cryptsy means they somehow can't "validate" it? If it's in a transaction, it's valid! How else could it be included in a transaction?

Understand that it's not that I am out on a campaign to change cryptsy or the rules they impose on their users. I'm simply trying to understand why they have these concerns and rules in the first place.

And to everyone who's "speculating" answers, please don't because that leads to nowhere.

-Michael

[prolom]

I know it's an old topic but I ran into warnings about p2pool and cryptsy and coinex...

"please do not use CoinEX deposit addresses as a target for P2Pool payouts. P2Pools generate uncommon transactions that do not include target address thus making us unable to identify account where those transactions should be credited to." and "Do NOT mine directly directly to your Cryptsy deposit address. "

The transactions do seem to work in my case but some users report losing coins.

Thanks.

[roy7]

I'm sorry but this makes no sense at all.

How is it I can send p2pool mined funds to myself (and spend it immediately), but sending the exact same mined funds to cryptsy means they somehow can't "validate" it? If it's in a transaction, it's valid! How else could it be included in a transaction?

Understand that it's not that I am out on a campaign to change cryptsy or the rules they impose on their users. I'm simply trying to understand why they have these concerns and rules in the first place.

And to everyone who's "speculating" answers, please don't because that leads to nowhere.

-Michael

The problem is that some exchanges don't look in the "coinbase" of a block for any deposits. They only look in the transaction list. For example, here's a block:

https://blockchain.info/block-index/463325/0000000000000000ea53a26a87b429b6485ea65882aaa0ff5aca038df5df7410

Every block has a first section that is the payment for the block reward. It can be one miner, or many, depending on the pool that found it. The "from" is "No Inputs (Newly Generated Coins)". Those transactions without an input (brand new coins from thin air as a block reward) are not processed by some exchanges, and thus the warnings. There's no technical reason why the exchange can't process and handle those deposits, they just don't bother.

To give you a different example, Eligius pays out to it's miner right in the coinbase of the coin. They don't send transactions to their miners like most pools. (p2pool is the same way). Here is a block they found:

https://blockchain.info/block/00000000000000013f9c652afd5d683c83fa23526ee650f02205dcf8408aa512

And you'll see the "new generated coins" are paid directly to a couple dozen different people. A normal pool which collects your coins and then you get paid later, you can use any exchange address to receive those. It's just a transfer like any other. The only "iffy" situation is the newly generated coins because of exchanges not properly handling them. There's really no excuse for them not to.

Edit: Fixed typo.

[prolom]

That was such an informative reply, roy7.

So the main warning is to avoid direct transfers in p2pool-style pools (although multipool worked for me for some transactions). How do you know if the pool is acting like a p2pool - check the blockchain.info?

I actually disregard the warnings and mine (dogecoin in my case, what can you do...) directly to the exchange. It seems to work so far.

I wonder if the option where the miner is not identified is better from the anonymity point of view.

Thank you.

[Danglebee]

Thank you fore information!
i too have trouble understand but now clear in mind

I'm sorry but this makes no sense at all.

How is it I can send p2pool mined funds to myself (and spend it immediately), but sending the exact same mined funds to cryptsy means they somehow can't "validate" it? If it's in a transaction, it's valid! How else could it be included in a transaction?

Understand that it's not that I am out on a campaign to change cryptsy or the rules they impose on their users. I'm simply trying to understand why they have these concerns and rules in the first place.

And to everyone who's "speculating" answers, please don't because that leads to nowhere.

-Michael

The problem is that some exchanges don't look in the "coinbase" of a block for any deposits. They only look in the transaction list. For example, here's a block:

https://blockchain.info/block-index/463325/0000000000000000ea53a26a87b429b6485ea65882aaa0ff5aca038df5df7410

Every block has a first section that is the payment for the block reward. It can be one miner, or many, depending on the pool that found it. The "from" is "No Inputs (Newly Generated Coins)". Those transactions without an input (brand new coins from thin air as a block read) are not processed by some exchanges, and thus the warnings. There's no technical reason why the exchange can't process and handle those deposits, they just don't bother.

To give you a different example, Eligius pays out to it's miner right in the coinbase of the coin. They don't send transactions to their miners like most pools. (p2pool is the same way). Here is a block they found:

https://blockchain.info/block/00000000000000013f9c652afd5d683c83fa23526ee650f02205dcf8408aa512

And you'll see the "new generated coins" are paid directly to a couple dozen different people. A normal pool which collects your coins and then you get paid later, you can use any exchange address to receive those. It's just a transfer like any other. The only "iffy" situation is the newly generated coins because of exchanges not properly handling them. There's really no excuse for them not to.

[roy7]

That was such an informative reply, roy7.

So the main warning is to avoid direct transfers in p2pool-style pools (although multipool worked for me for some transactions). How do you know if the pool is acting like a p2pool - check the blockchain.info?

I actually disregard the warnings and mine (dogecoin in my case, what can you do...) directly to the exchange. It seems to work so far.

I wonder if the option where the miner is not identified is better from the anonymity point of view.

Thank you.

If an exchange supports it, they support it. Are you using Cryptsy? I think I've heard people say before it works with them. I don't believe BTC-E works. I have no idea on MtGox.

To see how a pool works just find a recent block they found from the pool's stats. On the newly generated coins, did they all go to a single address (the pool), or do dozens of addresses (the miners). Not many pools pay out directly. P2Pool does and Eligius does. My TRC pool does. It's rare.

[prolom]

I'm using Cryptsy and Coinex. Both seem to tolerate deposits from pools even though they warn against it.

I'll look into the block stats later on - my current pool's front end is down at the moment.

[Sonny]

I'm using Cryptsy and Coinex. Both seem to tolerate deposits from pools even though they warn against it.

I'll look into the block stats later on - my current pool's front end is down at the moment.

OP was talking about p2pool.

For pools like p2pool and Eligius, the pool payment will be done in coinbase transaction (block reward transaction with no inputs).
For other pools like btcguild, the pool will send you payment as an ordinary bitcoin tx.

[roy7]

I'm using Cryptsy and Coinex. Both seem to tolerate deposits from pools even though they warn against it.

I'll look into the block stats later on - my current pool's front end is down at the moment.

Another concern is if your mining payments are too small it will accumulate dust in the exchange's wallet and increase the network fee to send payments.

[adolife]

how about blockchain.info?