300 BTC Coding Contest: Distributed Exchange (MasterCoin Developer Thread)

[Bitoy]

There are transactions where the change address is the highest value.

Ex.
58effd6afc7980392b17ba012943915a9be1db3a6d025969e5d5a197a3e25bc3

Reference address
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7 (0.00056 BTC - Output)

Out
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7 - (Spent) 0.00028 BTC
1BaMPFdqMUQ4DLtPtRbfHkEFScBGmyvYA - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC
1LdgFp2gLvWfkPnyTYAtH7ENnzgBDdNwfd - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC
1EXoDusjGwvnjZUyKkxZ4UHEf77z6A5S4P - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC


Should this transaction be valid or invalid? 

The data can be read using peek and decode. 

[Tachikoma]

Why shouldn't this be a valid transaction? Sorry I think I'm not seeing something.

[Bitoy]

Why shouldn't this be a valid transaction? Sorry I think I'm not seeing something.

58effd6afc7980392b17ba012943915a9be1db3a6d025969e5d5a197a3e25bc3

Is not in master-explorer and masterchest, and invalid in masterchain .  It's valid in mymastercoins.


I think it is valid because user sent it first.
Balance 215 msc
58effd6afc7980392b17ba012943915a9be1db3a6d025969e5d5a197a3e25bc3,  block. 273217  200 msc

Balance 15
Then sent
4c70f475496beac289e1db74204e0a3501aa920bafe8f618375aa88715e702a1,  block 273231. 215 msc

Which is invalid because he doesn't have enough msc.

[Tachikoma]

Ok! I will check that later

[prophetx]

We will likely get swamped with service requests after this contest is completed and wallets become available to the general public, so we need start looking for someone now to address support operations.

Anyone know someone who might be interested in being the Support Lead for Mastercoin?  Who has experience with apps like zendesk, uservoice, atlassian, etc.


Please refer to this proposed RBB:
https://trello.com/c/2yclWbPg

discussion thread is here:
http://talk.mastercoin.org/index.php?p=/discussion/20/support-lead?new=1

[zathras]

There are transactions where the change address is the highest value.

Ex.
58effd6afc7980392b17ba012943915a9be1db3a6d025969e5d5a197a3e25bc3

Reference address
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7 (0.00056 BTC - Output)

Out
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7 - (Spent) 0.00028 BTC
1BaMPFdqMUQ4DLtPtRbfHkEFScBGmyvYA - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC
1LdgFp2gLvWfkPnyTYAtH7ENnzgBDdNwfd - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC
1EXoDusjGwvnjZUyKkxZ4UHEf77z6A5S4P - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC


Should this transaction be valid or invalid? 

The data can be read using peek and decode. 

Sorry to nitpick but for clarity reference address = recipient, not sender

Yep this fits peek & decode without ambiguity I believe (the sequence numbers are way off, but since the change output has a different amount & we ignore Exodus & peek the data address, there is only one address left which has to be the reference)

Peek & decode actually isn't in masterchest.info prod at the mo.  From dev:

Info:

Code:

select FROMADD,TOADD,VALUE,CURTYPE from transactions where txid='58effd6afc7980392b17ba012943915a9be1db3a6d025969e5d5a197a3e25bc3'

Code:

FROMADD                                 TOADD                                   VALUE           CURTYPE
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7	1LdgFp2gLvWfkPnyTYAtH7ENnzgBDdNwfd	20000000000	1

Valid? (0=No, 1=Yes)

Code:

select VALID from transactions_processed where txid='58effd6afc7980392b17ba012943915a9be1db3a6d025969e5d5a197a3e25bc3'

Code:

VALID
1

The other transaction you mentioned (this is valid on masterchest.info prod) - Valid? (0=No, 1=Yes)

Code:

select VALID from transactions_processed where txid='4c70f475496beac289e1db74204e0a3501aa920bafe8f618375aa88715e702a1'

Code:

VALID
0

TL:DR;
* Masterchest.info prod doesn't recognize the first transaction as it doesn't support peek & decode and the sequence numbers are bad. 
* Dev does recognize the first transaction via peek & decode and considers it valid.  It does not consider the second transaction you mentioned valid.

Dev is a bit of a mess at the moment (as I'm playing around with multiple outputs trying to break something ) but the peek & decode code will make it into the next engine update.

Tachikoma, are you interpreting all this the same way?

Thanks!

[Tachikoma]

I am having some trouble with this transaction. It isn't helping that I haven't fixed my tree validations yet... I will make some time this weekend to catch up!

[Bitoy]

There are transactions where the change address is the highest value.

Ex.
58effd6afc7980392b17ba012943915a9be1db3a6d025969e5d5a197a3e25bc3

Reference address
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7 (0.00056 BTC - Output)

Out
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7 - (Spent) 0.00028 BTC
1BaMPFdqMUQ4DLtPtRbfHkEFScBGmyvYA - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC
1LdgFp2gLvWfkPnyTYAtH7ENnzgBDdNwfd - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC
1EXoDusjGwvnjZUyKkxZ4UHEf77z6A5S4P - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC


Should this transaction be valid or invalid? 

The data can be read using peek and decode. 

Sorry to nitpick but for clarity reference address = recipient, not sender

Yep this fits peek & decode without ambiguity I believe (the sequence numbers are way off, but since the change output has a different amount & we ignore Exodus & peek the data address, there is only one address left which has to be the reference)

Sender (thanks for clarifying reference = recipient)
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7 will be happy he still has 15 msc but someone won't be.  We have to sync ASAP.

[junsha]

I wan't to test the "MyMastercoins Wallet" features,
anyone can send me few Test MSC?
 
1AN1HQxgSxjz1y3Pe5tVT7zmg1FtqD8pN

Many thanks!

[Tachikoma]

There are transactions where the change address is the highest value.

Ex.
58effd6afc7980392b17ba012943915a9be1db3a6d025969e5d5a197a3e25bc3

Reference address
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7 (0.00056 BTC - Output)

Out
195NyMnCNF8GQYN6gKLuf5LsArgoi5NCW7 - (Spent) 0.00028 BTC
1BaMPFdqMUQ4DLtPtRbfHkEFScBGmyvYA - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC
1LdgFp2gLvWfkPnyTYAtH7ENnzgBDdNwfd - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC
1EXoDusjGwvnjZUyKkxZ4UHEf77z6A5S4P - (Unspent) 0.00006 BTC


Should this transaction be valid or invalid? 

The data can be read using peek and decode. 

I've added supported for these type of transactions and are adding them the site now

[Bitoy]

I wan't to test the "MyMastercoins Wallet" features,
anyone can send me few Test MSC?
 
1AN1HQxgSxjz1y3Pe5tVT7zmg1FtqD8pN

Many thanks!

Please wait for the next version.   I'll release it by Friday. 

[Bitoy]

Using MyMastercoins Wallet,  I was able to buy TMSC in the Distributed exchange

Seller 1BKpa19m5Xy9SvSzC5djPWtCfbuynSDwmb
1.088 TMSC

Buyer
1QFWodNASZv8KRHnhypKaMys5CGRg7GrFQ

Purchasing Transaction
189e0d3f4c4cdc04a70a71d7bcb78ad3c4685220d5931d58ab811443e87afba6

Payment Transaction
3e782683a14db5c1e06a6e2f04495c369382f2805ef2ebd397f613ef645d88a2

Verified at
http://mastercoin-explorer.com/transactions/189e0d3f4c4cdc04a70a71d7bcb78ad3c4685220d5931d58ab811443e87afba6

Today's test

Date: 12/12/2013 5:17:07 PM      
Sender: 1QFWodNASZv8KRHnhypKaMys5CGRg7GrFQ      
Amount Sent: 0.00112400 TMSC   Distributed Exchange    
Recipient: 1BKpa19m5Xy9SvSzC5djPWtCfbuynSDwmb

Seller TX
befd00ec3c9d1cc9528b57da85a082370f693ebd4709b065546f5e731ff55ef2

Purchase Offer Tx
37c1ad7fe6836a36cf1812b9081a3313310aa9add2868017ad309093a98a19a2

Payment Tx
86f5c24b046f7f08b1536e27c9ffab3422396f8d421a9033c76d81141017b8a2

Already confirmed at (Set Miner's fee a minimum of  0.0002.   It's a bit faster =)
http://www.mymastercoins.com/Orders.aspx?CurrencyID=2

Waiting for Master Explorer to confirm.

[W2014]

^ Great news! 

[Bitoy]

MyMastercoins result is same as mastercoinexplorer. 
http://mymastercoins.com/?addr=1LsSF18x1o8hpgbArgoWy9fd65jniNMCfj

Please wait for Zathras, I think he will be updating masterchest soon.

Still no concordance here:

1)    http://mastercoin-explorer.com/addresses/1LsSF18x1o8hpgbArgoWy9fd65jniNMCfj
2)    https://masterchest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=1LsSF18x1o8hpgbArgoWy9fd65jniNMCfj

There are second generation transactions which depend from these corrupt transactions and people on the far end of them starting to panic.  Can we get a resolution?  

Tachikoma?  Zathras?  Bitoy?  

Waiting for your instructions.

Same here:

https://masterchest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=139Dx25QXHBJD1tfLQMwASAAJrWFiM4BPz
http://mastercoin-explorer.com/addresses/139Dx25QXHBJD1tfLQMwASAAJrWFiM4BPz

[achillez]

I'm really intrigued by the mastercoin concept. What's the best way to dive into this? I have a few BTC laying around, also could do some development if needed.

[Tachikoma]

Still no concordance here:

1)    http://mastercoin-explorer.com/addresses/1LsSF18x1o8hpgbArgoWy9fd65jniNMCfj
2)    https://masterchest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=1LsSF18x1o8hpgbArgoWy9fd65jniNMCfj

There are second generation transactions which depend from these corrupt transactions and people on the far end of them starting to panic.  Can we get a resolution?  

Tachikoma?  Zathras?  Bitoy?  

Waiting for your instructions.

Same here:

https://masterchest.info/lookupadd.aspx?address=139Dx25QXHBJD1tfLQMwASAAJrWFiM4BPz
http://mastercoin-explorer.com/addresses/139Dx25QXHBJD1tfLQMwASAAJrWFiM4BPz

I think in these instances Mastercoin-explorer and Mymastercoin's are leading since they support these transactions. However Zathras might have a compelling argument to not support them. All I can do is advice everybody who is involved with these addresses to freeze transactions until we all have the same result. 

[Bitoy]

Hi Tachikoma

Please check txid
7705abd4eaa4741482e7dfc91e804c1fa6e9acb5a0249fbd68779092c4fd1ac1

Master explorer recipient 1E9KMM8fK724e7L4rusZXFKyfeKYLPKFNm
Mymastercoins recipient:   1EA49wSmDmgRLqjZVrSGqvRaRftrvmbouh            

Recipient sequence code should be data sequence code - 1?

[Tachikoma]

Wooops! That should't be happening! Thanks for the heads up.

[Tachikoma]

I have a problem with this specific data-address and I have no clue how this is even possible.

Edit: NM, I wasn't fully awake yet.

[Bitoy]

I looked for the data address first using "peek and decode".  Got the sequence number (SN) of the data address.Then looked for an address with the data sequence (SN-1).   This is the recipient address.

I have a problem with this specific data-address and I have no clue how this is even possible.

Edit: NM, I wasn't fully awake yet.