[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency

[smooth]

Where are all these orphans coming from? It's becoming harder to believe that it's entirely due to the 1 minute block times .. maybe that combined with the incredible mining speed increases we have now changes a few things...?

There are a number of factors which contribute to orphans but they all stem ultimately from the one minute block time, which just too fast for an ad-hoc p2p type network. If you were running a centrally managed financial backbone (or you want to turn a coin into one) then you can probably optimize everything such that one minute blocks mostly work. But for a decentralized peer-to-peer system, it doesn't work. 

If you look at these coins, Monero (1 min) generally has the most orphans and Duck (4 min) the least, though this of course varies according to network conditions. Probably closer to 4 minutes might be right, given the high cost of verification. 2 minutes is the bare minimum.

However, I would add that orphans really aren't as bad as they seem. The block target is determined by the rate of accepted blocks. If there weren't orphans the difficulty would be correspondingly higher. Everything comes out about the same, except more overhead and other secondary factors which aren't great and should be addressed by increasing the block time and optimizing the code in other ways. But it really isn't a "waste" of hashes or anything like that.

[1652924866]

1652924866

[1652924866]

1652924866

[1652924866]

1652924866

[33zer0w0lf]

Extreme Pool

Come visit us at http://www.extremepool.org, the #1 Pool for Cryptonote Coins!!
We are starting this weeks promotion early for the MRO Pool:

This Weeks Promotion:
http://mro.extremepool.org
0% Fee

[surfer43]

Address 454HDLDtqCLS24EsDAYorf9QAVkNqQPdJTaEBrdi9pVELUH6ZSU37VqV8UAoTYV7kX34w1NvpPrrM7F RA9BwWS8nFCGtWEK: please stop trying to mine on MoneroPool.org with simpleminer! Use cpuminer-multi instead.

cant you just disconnect him?

I've added a rule to iptables to drop all connections with "simpleminer" in the HTTP request, but it just. won't. work. 

Code:

DROP       tcp  --  anywhere             anywhere             tcp dpt:5555 STRING match  "simpleminer" ALGO name bm TO 65535

The server is being flooded with this stupid lazyminer.

[drawingthesun]

Address 454HDLDtqCLS24EsDAYorf9QAVkNqQPdJTaEBrdi9pVELUH6ZSU37VqV8UAoTYV7kX34w1NvpPrrM7F RA9BwWS8nFCGtWEK: please stop trying to mine on MoneroPool.org with simpleminer! Use cpuminer-multi instead.

cant you just disconnect him?

I've added a rule to iptables to drop all connections with "simpleminer" in the HTTP request, but it just. won't. work. 

Code:

DROP       tcp  --  anywhere             anywhere             tcp dpt:5555 STRING match  "simpleminer" ALGO name bm TO 65535

The server is being flooded with this stupid lazyminer.

Can't you find his IP and have the server block it completely?

[surfer43]

Can't you find his IP and have the server block it completely?

Too many IPs to manually block. I guess I can add https://github.com/pkrumins/node-iptables to the pool software to automatically block the IPs if they send malformed messages.

[Keyboard-Mash]

There are a number of factors which contribute to orphans but they all stem ultimately from the one minute block time, which just too fast for an ad-hoc p2p type network. If you were running a centrally managed financial backbone (or you want to turn a coin into one) then you can probably optimize everything such that one minute blocks mostly work. But for a decentralized peer-to-peer system, it doesn't work. 

If you look at these coins, Monero (1 min) generally has the most orphans and Duck (4 min) the least, though this of course varies according to network conditions. Probably closer to 4 minutes might be right, given the high cost of verification. 2 minutes is the bare minimum.

However, I would add that orphans really aren't as bad as they seem. The block target is determined by the rate of accepted blocks. If there weren't orphans the difficulty would be correspondingly higher. Everything comes out about the same, except more overhead and other secondary factors which aren't great and should be addressed by increasing the block time and optimizing the code in other ways. But it really isn't a "waste" of hashes or anything like that.

Hm, I know that there's a whole lot going on that causes this .. do you have any decent links that I can read up on to understand the situation better? You describe the situation very well, and I'd like to know more about specifically how multiple block solutions propagate through the network vs. which one is ultimately settled on (as well as the type of network infrastructure that it is propagated on) .. but I don't really know where to look.

[smooth]

There are a number of factors which contribute to orphans but they all stem ultimately from the one minute block time, which just too fast for an ad-hoc p2p type network. If you were running a centrally managed financial backbone (or you want to turn a coin into one) then you can probably optimize everything such that one minute blocks mostly work. But for a decentralized peer-to-peer system, it doesn't work.  

If you look at these coins, Monero (1 min) generally has the most orphans and Duck (4 min) the least, though this of course varies according to network conditions. Probably closer to 4 minutes might be right, given the high cost of verification. 2 minutes is the bare minimum.

However, I would add that orphans really aren't as bad as they seem. The block target is determined by the rate of accepted blocks. If there weren't orphans the difficulty would be correspondingly higher. Everything comes out about the same, except more overhead and other secondary factors which aren't great and should be addressed by increasing the block time and optimizing the code in other ways. But it really isn't a "waste" of hashes or anything like that.

Hm, I know that there's a whole lot going on that causes this .. do you have any decent links that I can read up on to understand the situation better? You describe the situation very well, and I'd like to know more about specifically how multiple block solutions propagate through the network vs. which one is ultimately settled on (as well as the type of network infrastructure that it is propagated on) .. but I don't really know where to look.

Satishi's paper described how one block is settled on, with the assumption of a random walk (not always correct, but correct to a point). As far as the actual network, there was another paper that measured bitcoin's propagation delays but I can't find it right now. There have also been some threads looking at propagation on ultra-fast coins such as DOGE (60 seconds), but again I can't find the links right now.

Also interesting to play with is a node simulator I remember seeing. I think someone posted a link to one on this thread, but at 200+ pages, it will be hard to find.

[33zer0w0lf]

I am trying to compile wolf's miner On my linux box (64 bit CentOS 6.5) with no luck so far.

Any hints about how to compile this miner on CentOS?

I am also trying to compile Luca's one on CentOS but with no luck. When i try to run minerd it just stops saying illegal instruction. If you find a solution please tell me...

In case jap1968 havent solved the problem, or for anyone else, all i had to do was to upgrade my gcc. Thanks Wolf that told me

http://ask.xmodulo.com/upgrade-gcc-centos.html

Thanks for your help. Unfortunately, even after having done this, I am still unable to compile. This is the error message that I get:

Code:

# ./autogen.sh
configure.ac:3: error: Autoconf version 2.69 or higher is required

I have autogen 2.63 installed:

Code:

# autoconf --version
autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.63

so if you have autogen 2.63 installed, and 2.69 or higher is required, I would think maybe upgrade to 2.69 or higher would fix your issue.

[xnbya]

For the next 10 blocks found at minemro.com the block finder will get a 1MRO bonus.
Come and join us now, you may get lucky!

[GreekBitcoin]

...
Thanks for your help. Unfortunately, even after having done this, I am still unable to compile. This is the error message that I get:

Code:

# ./autogen.sh
configure.ac:3: error: Autoconf version 2.69 or higher is required

I have autogen 2.63 installed:

Code:

# autoconf --version
autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.63

so if you have autogen 2.63 installed, and 2.69 or higher is required, I would think maybe upgrade to 2.69 or higher would fix your issue.

Oh yes! That is rather obvious.

The version that I have currently installed is the one available in the official repository. I am reluctant to change versions since this machine is a public web server (with a very low load and much CPU available) giving a real service. Is there any way of updating this package without undesired side effects?

Thats the problem. I have stated about this in wolfs thread that after updating autoconf it worked for ubuntu. So it should work. But its up to you to decide.

[expert-lister]

Why Cryptsy and Mintpal didn't add MRO to coin voting?

[TTM]

Why Cryptsy and Mintpal didn't add MRO to coin voting?

I don't know, MRO isn't even on Mintpal voting list. I thought at least one of us would have been sent an email to suggest this coin ?

[expert-lister]

Why Cryptsy and Mintpal didn't add MRO to coin voting?

I don't know, MRO isn't even on Mintpal voting list. I thought at least one of us would have been sent an email to suggest this coin ?

I has been send email to Mintpal and Cryptsy own, For more profitable, we need add to Cryptsy or Mintpal. 

[drawingthesun]

Why Cryptsy and Mintpal didn't add MRO to coin voting?

I don't know, MRO isn't even on Mintpal voting list. I thought at least one of us would have been sent an email to suggest this coin ?

I asked to have Monero on the voting list. They said that they have no plans to add Monero.

At this point I think we must ignore Mintpal, now the Monero community sounds desperate to be their exchange. I couldn't care less with their attitude.

[smooth]

Why Cryptsy and Mintpal didn't add MRO to coin voting?

Because they don't want to do the work to integrate a coin that isn't bitcoin clone.

[sorryforthat]

Why Cryptsy and Mintpal didn't add MRO to coin voting?

Because they don't want to do the work to integrate a coin that isn't bitcoin clone.

They will come around, Its a matter of stability at this point. They dont want to jeopardize it if something bad were to happen.

[expert-lister]

Why Cryptsy and Mintpal didn't add MRO to coin voting?

I don't know, MRO isn't even on Mintpal voting list. I thought at least one of us would have been sent an email to suggest this coin ?

I asked to have Monero on the voting list. They said that they have no plans to add Monero.

At this point I think we must ignore Mintpal, now the Monero community sounds desperate to be their exchange. I couldn't care less with their attitude.

It doesn't matter (MintPal) and Its ignore from our !nvestors, Also Cryptsy have problem to MRO?

[ImI]

Why Cryptsy and Mintpal didn't add MRO to coin voting?

afaik its a technical issue. to add a bitcoin/litecoin-clone is no big deal for them. but monero etc are different and require some extra work to do.

[dewdeded]

In its current stage it isnt even desired for MRO to be at exchanges.

[othe]

In its current stage it isnt even desired for MRO to be at exchanges.

Of course it is, its the only way to spread the coin distribution right from the beginning.