Search results

Thanks, oblox and TaoOfSatoshi. I did unlocked my wallet for a very long time. I will just wait for the Instant X to mix.

It took me forever to get more than one round for mixing less than 10 DRK and it is still not finishing. Should I leave the wallet unlocked during the mixing process or am I doing something wrong? P.S. I observed the number of rounds by opening the coin control window.

When will we see the second enforcement? I think we should try it sooner rather than later. We do not know if there are other exploits out there. So, the earlier we find out, the earlier we may see another update.

While there are some issues, the number of MNs now exceeds 1010. I guess they are increasing their MNs.

So, if they just let the blockchain split, we cannot do anything about it. Right? Or, we can start blocking them or banning them on the network. I think we can stop their earnings first without splitting the blockchain. Right? EDIT: I think we can do that one at a time. If we can stop the...

If I understand correclty, peer-to-peer requires the majority to agree on something. But, the powerful minorities can launch attack on the good majority and win if they put enough resources into this.

That's what I have been worrying about: resistance from the miners/pool.

Let me try this later. I have other things to finish at the moment.

Do we need to do anything about the enforcement? e.g. there is a command masternode enforcement.

My MN just disconnected my ssh session, not just closing the darkcoind port. It happened roughly when the enforcement was announced and I was running the 0.10.15.16 version downloaded from github and compiled on my own system. I remember seeing the cpu activity went up on one of the darkcoind...

Anyone lost their connections to their MN's? I was connected to my MN and suddenly saw an increase in cpu load on the darkcoind thread and now it is disconnected from the network.

Hi! Guys. What does the closed ports mean on drk.mn if the MN's have their ports opened for incoming connections? Are those MNs currently under some DDoS attack?

Besides drk.mn, drk.poolhash.org, my own MN and my local machine, what else can we do to check our MN's status on other clients/MN's?

Hi, guys. Can someone tell me why we change the following code in main.cpp? if (sigTime <= GetAdjustedTime() - 60 * 60) { LogPrintf("dseep: Signature rejected, too far into the past %s\n", vin.ToString().c_str()); //pfrom->Misbehaving(20); return...

Me neither. But, what if the DoS attack is initiated by the other MN's on the network? They sent you junk or faking other nodes to increase your banscore seen by other MN's or clients.

It is too many to show here. I only have 300 to 800 MN's here. It changes from time to time. If I set a lower banscore from the command line option, it is roughly 300 MN's most of the time. Then, the "masternode winners" command returns a list that is mostly empty. But, the error messages are...

Could someone tell me why we don't add the ban score anymore after v0.10.15.14 when signature is rejected for too far into the past? It also don't add any ban score for getting bad masternode address signature since. I think many of us are not getting paid because someone is DoS'ing the network...

I get many of these "Couldn't find masternode entry ..." in the log file: dseep: Couldn't find masternode entry CTxIn(COutPoint(e47356587595bce7bd761bc775414d494578dda8d5ad4892ebf22b60841cd0c8, 1), scriptSig=) dseep: Asking source node for missing entry...

What does the mostly empty payee list mean? % darkcoind masternode winners { "158167" : "", "158168" : "", "158169" : "", "158170" : "", "158171" : "", "158172" : "Xh3BwpkVtkP7xTWTZZceVhq4AGur2Hkzhr", "158173" : "", "158174" : "", "158175" : "", "158176"...

Yes, I do understand. And, that's why I feel sorry about my childish complaint. Let's not go off topic again. I will try harder not to act like a child. Perhaps, spend some time to read the code instead.