NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[Come-from-Beyond]

CFB: will those 100 VPS help? How much would be needed to make the network safe for the beginnings?

Yes, these 100 VPS will help a lot. We can't be sure that this number is enough though, this is just a matter of money that must be spent to bring Nxt network down.

[1714201467]

1714201467

[1714201467]

1714201467

[laowai80]

Eventually, it would find a healthy node.  As the network grows and zombie nodes make up a smaller percent of the nodes, this will be less of a problem.

Yeah, maybe the best course of action is to set up small hallmarked nodes.
Create a small hallmark, with a Weight of 100 or so. Set up a special 'node' account, fund it with 100 NXT, create a hallmark against it. If there are hundreds of hallmarked accounts with 100 Weight, that should help.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Does anyone have an updated official nextfiles.zip ? my blocks have been out of whack since the DDOSers

There is no official nextfiles.zip. Delete *.nxt files and let the client to do the rest.

[gbeirn]

Eventually, it would find a healthy node.  As the network grows and zombie nodes make up a smaller percent of the nodes, this will be less of a problem.

Yeah, maybe the best course of action is to set up small hallmarked nodes.
Create a small hallmark, with a Weight of 100 or so. Set up a special 'node' account, fund it with 100 NXT, create a hallmark against it. If there are hundreds of hallmarked accounts with 100 Weight, that should help.

Yes, this is what I am wondering, what is the best course of action right now if we can't get everyone to remove their hallmark? Is there an optimal NXT amount a hallmark should have?

[EmoneyRu]

Eventually, it would find a healthy node.  As the network grows and zombie nodes make up a smaller percent of the nodes, this will be less of a problem.

Yeah, maybe the best course of action is to set up small hallmarked nodes.
Create a small hallmark, with a Weight of 100 or so. Set up a special 'node' account, fund it with 100 NXT, create a hallmark against it. If there are hundreds of hallmarked accounts with 100 Weight, that should help.

Or maybe set weight when getting hallmark to 100?

[laowai80]

I just manually resynced all the nodes 20-30 mins ago.

Well, hallmarked ones got stuck at block 23547
bandwidth graph shows 5 mb/s ddos to them.

non hallmarked nodes sync well and are at block 23567 now.

so, yeah, we need thousands of small weight hallmarked nodes.
Unless CfB can offer other solutions.

[laowai80]

Or maybe set weight when getting hallmark to 100?

The Weight grows automatically if you fund the account with more NXTs
It has to be a special 'node' account with only 100 NXTs in it.

[gbeirn]

Hmmm, well I certainly want to setup more nodes but only if they will be helpful to the network. The logic behind not hallmarking nodes makes sense. I can either setup many un-hallmarked or move some NXT around and setup a few hallmarked ones. I'm off to bed since I'm quite tired. I'll review the thread tomorrow and maybe we can figure out a good way to proceed.

Maybe we can setup some servers with good DDoS protection in the mean time until we can figure out what to do.

Do NOT setup nodes that are not hallmarked.  These unhallmarked nodes hurt the network because they only request information from hallmarked nodes and these hallmarked nodes are the only nodes servicing the network.

The type of DDoS protection you are referring to doesn't do any good with this type of DDoS attack.  This DDoS attack is an application level attack against HALLMARKED nodes.

OK, gotcha, sorry it's way past my bedtime. So it appears we needn't have differentiation between types of nodes, meaning either they should be majority hallmarked or none at all...Correct?

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

[opticalcarrier]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

[2Kool4Skewl]

Hmmm, well I certainly want to setup more nodes but only if they will be helpful to the network. The logic behind not hallmarking nodes makes sense. I can either setup many un-hallmarked or move some NXT around and setup a few hallmarked ones. I'm off to bed since I'm quite tired. I'll review the thread tomorrow and maybe we can figure out a good way to proceed.

Maybe we can setup some servers with good DDoS protection in the mean time until we can figure out what to do.

Do NOT setup nodes that are not hallmarked.  These unhallmarked nodes hurt the network because they only request information from hallmarked nodes and these hallmarked nodes are the only nodes servicing the network.

The type of DDoS protection you are referring to doesn't do any good with this type of DDoS attack.  This DDoS attack is an application level attack against HALLMARKED nodes.

OK, gotcha, sorry it's way past my bedtime. So it appears we needn't have differentiation between types of nodes, meaning either they should be majority hallmarked or none at all...Correct?

Yes.  The current problem is that network requests are not being distributed to healthy nodes.  They are being concentrated on hallmarked nodes only regardless of their workload or sync status.

[laowai80]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

[gbeirn]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I think we are thinking along the same lines:

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

[2Kool4Skewl]

I just manually resynced all the nodes 20-30 mins ago.

Well, hallmarked ones got stuck at block 23547
bandwidth graph shows 5 mb/s ddos to them.

non hallmarked nodes sync well and are at block 23567 now.

so, yeah, we need thousands of small weight hallmarked nodes.
Unless CfB can offer other solutions.

Hallmarking might work if all nodes that were marked that had over a certain nxt balance.  For instance, you could hallmark a node with 100 nxt, but a node hallmarked with 100 nxt and a node hallmarked with 100,000 nxt would have the same priority with peers.  This would make running a zombie network more costly because each zombie node would be forced to have a 100 nxt hallmark.

[laowai80]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I think we are thinking along the same lines:

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

Yes, many 100 Weight nodes, or any other small number will do. Someone should manage the donation fund for that purpose specifically and verify that hallmarked nodes with paid out amounts are indeed running with the paid out Weight value.

[gbeirn]

I just manually resynced all the nodes 20-30 mins ago.

Well, hallmarked ones got stuck at block 23547
bandwidth graph shows 5 mb/s ddos to them.

non hallmarked nodes sync well and are at block 23567 now.

so, yeah, we need thousands of small weight hallmarked nodes.
Unless CfB can offer other solutions.

Hallmarking might work if all nodes that were marked that had over a certain nxt balance.  For instance, you could hallmark a node with 100 nxt, but a node hallmarked with 100 nxt and a node hallmarked with 100,000 nxt would have the same priority with peers.  This would make running a zombie network more costly because each zombie node would be forced to have a 100 nxt hallmark.

edit:
nevermind, wrong post

[laowai80]

a node hallmarked with 100 nxt and a node hallmarked with 100,000 nxt would have the same priority with peers.

CfB, please confirm if this is true?
If true, it shouldn't be that way, I think?
More weight = more trust from peers approach is better?

[2Kool4Skewl]

you guys are confusing me with weight.... i have 6 hallmarked nodes, each on a separate IP.  if i set the weight to 100 on all of them, then doesnt each hallmarked node appear to have 1/6 of my hallmarked accounts balance?

I think that no matter what you set the Weight too, the Weight will show what your account holds now. And if you add more to that account, the Weight will reflect that accordingly. So there is a need to set up a special 'node' account and fund it with 100 NXT only. Maybe someone can set up a donation fund just for that and verify that people indeed set up hallmarked nodes with the amount they received from the donation fund by looking up the IP in the peers list.

I think we are thinking along the same lines:

Edit: and since it is unrealistic to un-hallmark all nodes our only option is to hallmark as many as possible to spread out the number of targets which can be DDoS'd....and we wouldn't want too many hallmarked nodes to stand out above the others since they would be the first targets. So maybe we all agree to setup nodes with similar weights?

Yes, many 100 Weight nodes, or any other small number will do. Someone should manage the donation fund for that purpose specifically and verify that hallmarked nodes with paid out amounts are indeed running with the paid out Weight value.

There needs to be a fallback mechanism in the code to allow for nodes that do not receive a response from hallmarked nodes to then request data from lesser and lesser weighted nodes.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Just blocks.nxt

Both must be deleted, otherwise blockchain will be inconsistent.

[2Kool4Skewl]

a node hallmarked with 100 nxt and a node hallmarked with 100,000 nxt would have the same priority with peers.

CfB, please confirm if this is true?
If true, it shouldn't be that way, I think?
More weight = more trust from peers approach is better?

The problem with this is that heavily weighted nodes are bigger targets to attack and when they get attacked, they disrupt the network to greater extent because they are being used as the main nodes.

[Anon136]

what port do i need to unblock for the client?

*edit* not for loopback to access the gui but for incoming and outgoing connections to peers