NXT :: descendant of Bitcoin - Updated Information

[laowai80]

I'm sure that would be possible, but hallmarking nodes is just a bad idea in my opinion.  Instead of using hallmarked nodes to stay in sync, nodes should simply use other nodes with the lowest ping time.

Well, hallmarks would work if everyone used them. Wait for a few hours and I'll release a version with disabled hallmarks.

Have it enabled by default though.
We should really try to set up this Special node donation fund and have everyone hallmark their nodes with at least 10 NXTs Weight.

[1714203731]

1714203731

[1714203731]

1714203731

[1714203731]

1714203731

[1714203731]

1714203731

[1714203731]

1714203731

[1714203731]

1714203731

[Come-from-Beyond]

- please do not delude yourself.  We are constantly stuck with a much lower depth then 720 blocks.

Alice on block 23577 of longest chain, Bob on block 23400 on a shorter chain. How do u know where the fork has happened? It may happen 2000 blocks ago and Bob won't be able to jump to a legit chain without redownloading the whole blockchain.

[achimsmile]

Am I on the right branch?

23578      4726268575002224579      24.12.2013 08:09:13   
13      0 + 13      1'804 B   
1      4648711128167189860      1395 %

[laowai80]

Am I on the right branch?

23578      4726268575002224579      24.12.2013 08:09:13   
13      0 + 13      1'804 B   
1      4648711128167189860      1395 %

yes

[OKNXT]

" There is insufficient memory for the Java Runtime Environment to continue."

My public node(2G RAM, 2CPU) went down after I added hallmark.

[abctc]

Well, hallmarks would work if everyone used them. Wait for a few hours and I'll release a version with disabled hallmarks.

- what??  May be you should release a hallmarks-only version ??  I do not whant to see a zombies in me Active peers window. I want to see (and communicate) only with hallmarked peers.

New users just should use the other server to obtain some NXT to setup their own hallmarked node, or to continue use of public servers.

[laowai80]

" There is insufficient memory for the Java Runtime Environment to continue."

My public node(2G RAM, 2CPU) went down after I added hallmark.

Yes, hallmarked nodes are under DDOS.

Try to run it like this:

java -Xms1200m -Xmx1500m -jar start.jar

I am not an expert on Java, play with those memory settings within your RAM limits, something could work. But DDOS sure causes a lot of issues.

[EmoneyRu]

I expect that it is obvious for many of you, but I'm sometimes getting fatal errors (low memory) and nxt stops.
Here is restart manual: http://pastebin.com/580iLLkq (It is for node with nxt only. CODE KILLS ALL JAVA APPLICATIONS!)

! If I'm mistaken - PM me, I'll update manual & edit link in the post

[abctc]

- please do not delude yourself.  We are constantly stuck with a much lower depth then 720 blocks.

Alice on block 23577 of longest chain, Bob on block 23400 on a shorter chain. How do u know where the fork has happened? It may happen 2000 blocks ago and Bob won't be able to jump to a legit chain without redownloading the whole blockchain.

- in other words, currently the node can not find the longest chain. Despite your previous statement (lets network to find longest chain).

[Come-from-Beyond]

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?

100.000 NXT node will attract 1000 times more traffic than 100 NXT one.

[Come-from-Beyond]

in other words, currently the node can not find the longest chain. Despite your previous statement (lets network to find longest chain).

They can. Or can not. Depends on the number of blocks that passed since the fork.

[Come-from-Beyond]

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.

Not 100% true. If heavily weighted node stops responding then he gets the red flag (disconnected) and peers ask other nodes (even non-hallmarked ones).

[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?

100.000 NXT node will attract 1000 times more traffic than 100 NXT one.

Maybe there shouldn't be linear dependance on the Weight, sort of diminishing dependance algorithm should be established. At least when software is in beta and there is a wider network of hallmarked nodes.

[Come-from-Beyond]

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

7874 and 7875 TCP

[opticalcarrier]

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

7874 and 7875 TCP

this is news to me... why should 7875 be forwarded on a NAT router/firewall?  I thought p2p only used 7874

[Come-from-Beyond]

It also seems that hallmarked accounts with large balances completely overpower smaller hallmarked accounts.  I don't think setting up a lot of hallmarked nodes with small balance will help much.

Even 1 NXT hallmark helps coz a lot of people use pushThreshold and pullThreshold set to 1 which means that non-hallmarked nodes will be ignored for outbound requests.

[Come-from-Beyond]

this is news to me... why should 7875 be forwarded on a NAT router/firewall?  I thought p2p only used 7874

We r planning to add ability to tunnel peer communication thru HTTPS.

[laowai80]

It also seems that hallmarked accounts with large balances completely overpower smaller hallmarked accounts.  I don't think setting up a lot of hallmarked nodes with small balance will help much.

Even 1 NXT hallmark helps coz a lot of people use pushThreshold and pullThreshold set to 1 which means that non-hallmarked nodes will be ignored for outbound requests.

So, can those values be set to 1 by default for new versions of the software? Or is it not safe now and should be set when there are more hallmarked nodes on the network?

[Come-from-Beyond]

So, can those values be set to 1 by default for new versions of the software? Or is it not safe now and should be set when there are more hallmarked nodes on the network?

0 is better coz most of zombies r behind NAT anyway.

[BitCoiner2012]

Can no longer log in to my wallet. It just hangs after clicking unlock....