v0.10.13.x RC5 Testing

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm still continuing my testing of smaller amounts because I feel many are testing large amounts but the amounts on mainnet will generally be smaller.
 
Evan, thanks for all the updates and addition of the first time configuration popup.

One small thing, in the final popup where it says you change the settings in options -- it would be best to explicitly state that you set the anonymized amount to any number you desire in the options.

I will leave the wording to you, but we don't want people thinking there is a cap like Minotaur did. Other than that... perfect. :smile:
 
oblox said:
I'm still continuing my testing of smaller amounts because I feel many are testing large amounts but the amounts on mainnet will generally be smaller.
Click to expand...
I think there might be some problem with large amounts not split up properly so I'm testing this big amount, and when it's done, I'll test small amounts again.
 
vertoe said:
Darksend Status = Disabled
Completition = 24%

on a brand new wallet with 0.0 funds. Default should be 0%?
Click to expand...
It was even 24% right after I started anonymization process. Had to dig into the settings (and hit apply) to refresh the GUI.
 
I have upgraded to wallet 13.7 and my p2pool node is not happy. Before posting this I went back to wallet 13.5 and all was well with p2pool. When on 13.7 as soon as I start p2pool my debug.log from testnet get spammed with the following:

2014-09-11 00:19:48 maxconnections check 248
2014-09-11 00:19:48 accepted connection 127.0.0.1:47530
2014-09-11 00:19:48 partner 127.0.0.1:47530 using obsolete version 70018; disconnecting
2014-09-11 00:19:48 ProcessMessage(version, 122 bytes) FAILED
2014-09-11 00:19:48 disconnecting node 127.0.0.1:47530

The port increments each time but for whatever reason p2pool can't make the rpc connection. Not sure where this version 70018 is coming from. I have made no adjustments and all other services faucet and block explorer continue to work fine. Did some version number not get updated? Can someone help me understand wtf is going on?
 
coingun said:
I have upgraded to wallet 13.7 and my p2pool node is not happy. Before posting this I went back to wallet 13.5 and all was well with p2pool. When on 13.7 as soon as I start p2pool my debug.log from testnet get spammed with the following:

2014-09-11 00:19:48 maxconnections check 248
2014-09-11 00:19:48 accepted connection 127.0.0.1:47530
2014-09-11 00:19:48 partner 127.0.0.1:47530 using obsolete version 70018; disconnecting
2014-09-11 00:19:48 ProcessMessage(version, 122 bytes) FAILED
2014-09-11 00:19:48 disconnecting node 127.0.0.1:47530

The port increments each time but for whatever reason p2pool can't make the rpc connection. Not sure where this version 70018 is coming from. I have made no adjustments and all other services faucet and block explorer continue to work fine. Did some version number not get updated? Can someone help me understand wtf is going on?
Click to expand...


check https://bitbucket.org/dstorm/p2pool...0ee9adbb8b424/p2pool/bitcoin/p2p.py?at=master
change version=70018 to version=70040 (higher than 70035)

https://github.com/darkcoinproject/darkcoin/commit/c50784d0f6702053476fbc5cb020ab4ec1980f56


I will check my node-stratum.
Code: 
2014-09-11 01:42:09 receive version message: /nodestratum/: version 70037, blocks=0, us=0.0.0.0:0, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=11


looks like nodestratum changes version by code.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
chaeplin said:
check https://bitbucket.org/dstorm/p2pool...0ee9adbb8b424/p2pool/bitcoin/p2p.py?at=master
change version=70018 to version=70040 (higher than 70035)

https://github.com/darkcoinproject/darkcoin/commit/c50784d0f6702053476fbc5cb020ab4ec1980f56


I will check my node-stratum.
Code: 
2014-09-11 01:42:09 receive version message: /nodestratum/: version 70037, blocks=0, us=0.0.0.0:0, them=0.0.0.0:0, peer=11


looks like nodestratum changes version by code.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I edited line 22 of /p2pool-drk/p2pool/bitcoin/p2p.py from version=70018 to version=70500 that should do me for all the revision's to come after RC5 launch :)
 
I have Options settings 5000 tdrk / 8 rounds. For several hours only 1000 tdrk got anonymized, and there are two large amounts of 4096 that have not split up. My guessing is there're not enough compatible denominations on testnet right now. But it seems large amounts have a hard time to anonymize.
 
moli said:
I have Options settings 5000 tdrk / 8 rounds. For several hours only 1000 tdrk got anonymized, and there are two large amounts of 4096 that have not split up. My guessing is there're not enough compatible denominations on testnet right now. But it seems large amounts have a hard time to anonymize.
Click to expand...
settings 1900 tDRK / 8 rounds
 
My linux qt client v101307 is set to anon 1000 tDRK, 4 rounds. I have 1048 anonymized and have completed the 4 rounds. But the status bar shows 69%. When I mouseover the status bar is says inputs have an average of 4 of 4 rounds. Status bar bug?
 
i'm testing it again on v.0.10.13.7 after having made a payment to myself of all my coins (19.999).

So far everything below input amount 1024 seems to three-client pair very fast,
i'm keeping an eye on the larger input amounts (1024, 2048, 4096).

I'm off to work now and see what happens when i'm back
 
"Use 3 clients in denominations to reduce the chance of sybil attacks.
This might cause a little blockchain bloat, but I think it's worth it."

http://jira.darkcoin.qa/browse/DRK-76

Would it be possible to connect to peers, partial mix, disconnect and mix with another set of peers as part of going around the master node network?
 
Coins101 said:
"Use 3 clients in denominations to reduce the chance of sybil attacks.
This might cause a little blockchain bloat, but I think it's worth it."

http://jira.darkcoin.qa/browse/DRK-76

Would it be possible to connect to peers, partial mix, disconnect and mix with another set of peers as part of going around the master node network?
Click to expand...
Meaning that the peers use a random masternode for each round : if they were together in r1 (round 1) they may not be together in r2 etc.
 
Kai said:
Meaning that the peers use a random masternode for each round : if they where together in r1 (round 1) they may not be together in r2 ?
Click to expand...

Yes.

If I try to snoop, I have no way to keep track.

If there are three peers as well, my data would become gibberish. I would have to set-up a sustained effort over a very long time to piece together a jigsaw puzzle, that might not yield any results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kai
Coins101 said:
Yes.

If I try to snoop, I have no way to keep track.

If there are three peers as well, my data would become gibberish. I would have to set-up a sustained effort over a very long time to piece together a jigsaw puzzle, that might not yield any results.
Click to expand...
Somehow I prefer the randomness, it could be more elegant. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top