v0.10.9.x Help test RC2 forking issues

Status
Not open for further replies.
Code: 
Remote MN conf:

rpcuser=Me
rpcpassword=blahblahblah
server=1
port=19999
masternodeprivkey=92mP5Lz8SLPskNSxsQoTbk1WK5fYXesEdT2FWzbgYfeppLuVuZK (from local wallet)
addnode=23.23.186.131
testnet=1
maxconnections=200
masternode=1

Local wallet:
rpcuser=Me
rpcpassword=blahblahblah
server=1
port=19999

externalip=ipadd:19999
OR
masternodeaddr:ipadd:19999

masternodeprivkey=92mP5Lz8SLPskNSxsQoTbk1WK5fYXesEdT2FWzbgYfeppLuVuZK
addnode=23.23.186.131
testnet=1
maxconnections=200
masternode=1
Can anyone please confirm that they have the remote or cold masternode running? Thanks :)

Configs tried with both externalip= and masternodeaddr= ('case it looks like that's what Evan said on pg 17)
Started remote darkcoind normally
started local darkcoind with the masternodeip=ipofremote:19999 (and I tried it without)
remote darkcoind did: darkcoind masternode debug
local darkcoind did: darkcoind masternode start

I also tried doing this with remote:
darkcoind
darkcoind masternode debug
then with local:
darkcoind masternodeaddr:ipaddress:19999
darkcoind masternode

Looked at debug log and didn't find the comment that a remote masternode started ok.
I've been trying all morning, even waited to see if it would show up on the masternode list, but nope, it didn't :( If anyone can say where I'm going wrong I'd sure appreciate it :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tante, I found when running my MNs on main net that I had problems if I 'recycled' addresses that I had previously used. When I generated a fresh address 0 and fresh privkey for the masternode (I only ran them with the DRK on the MN, maybe you need fresh addr 0 for the remote wallet too?) it always worked. Just a suggestion, I could be completely wrong! :)
 
TanteStefana said:
Code: 
Remote MN conf:

rpcuser=Me
rpcpassword=blahblahblah
server=1
port=19999
masternodeprivkey=92mP5Lz8SLPskNSxsQoTbk1WK5fYXesEdT2FWzbgYfeppLuVuZK (from local wallet)
addnode=23.23.186.131
testnet=1
maxconnections=200
masternode=1

Local wallet:
rpcuser=Me
rpcpassword=blahblahblah
server=1
port=19999

externalip=ipadd:19999
OR
masternodeaddr:ipadd:19999

masternodeprivkey=92mP5Lz8SLPskNSxsQoTbk1WK5fYXesEdT2FWzbgYfeppLuVuZK
addnode=23.23.186.131
testnet=1
maxconnections=200
masternode=1
Can anyone please confirm that they have the remote or cold masternode running? Thanks :)

Configs tried with both externalip= and masternodeaddr= ('case it looks like that's what Evan said on pg 17)
Started remote darkcoind normally
started local darkcoind with the masternodeip=ipofremote:19999 (and I tried it without)
remote darkcoind did: darkcoind masternode debug
local darkcoind did: darkcoind masternode start

I also tried doing this with remote:
darkcoind
darkcoind masternode debug
then with local:
darkcoind masternodeaddr:ipaddress:19999
darkcoind masternode

Looked at debug log and didn't find the comment that a remote masternode started ok.
I've been trying all morning, even waited to see if it would show up on the masternode list, but nope, it didn't :( If anyone can say where I'm going wrong I'd sure appreciate it :)
Click to expand...

Tante, I got cold/remote without issues on 10.9.6. Was without internet all day, so I'll update tomorrow.

On your local conf file, you do not need externalip=xx.xx.xx.xx
You only need masternodeaddr=REMOTE_IP:19999

Your remote conf looks fine to me, I think maxconnections=200 is only for pools? I use the regular 256, don't think would cause an issue though.

EDIT: just noticed you have "port=19999" - I dont have that on any of my conf file at all.

To test do

1) start remote darkcoind with "darkcoind" only, then
2) "darkcoind masternode debug" = error msg as described by Evan
3) start local wallet with only "darkcoind" then
4) "darkcoind masternode start" = should say "masternode started sucessfully" - if not something is wrong locally.
5) on remote "darkcoind masternode debug" - should now say "masternode started successfully"
6) shut off local wallet

Hope it helps
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TanteStefana said:
Code: 
Remote MN conf:
...
masternode=1
Can anyone please confirm that they have the remote or cold masternode running? Thanks :)

Configs tried with both externalip= and masternodeaddr= ('case it looks like that's what Evan said on pg 17)
Started remote darkcoind normally
started local darkcoind with the masternodeip=ipofremote:19999 (and I tried it without)
remote darkcoind did: darkcoind masternode debug
local darkcoind did: darkcoind masternode start

Looked at debug log and didn't find the comment that a remote masternode started ok.
I've been trying all morning, even waited to see if it would show up on the masternode list, but nope, it didn't :( If anyone can say where I'm going wrong I'd sure appreciate it :)
Click to expand...
I've been using your method :) https://darkcointalk.org/threads/remote-masternode-guide.410/

It has been working on testnet and I've been getting a lot of practice as I keep starting from scratch with a clean testnet3/ (same wallet.dat).
I have a flag :0 but I seem to be receiving MN payments on the local wallet (the one with >1000 DRK)
 
I'm gonna try some more. I have gotten a "masternode started" in my debug log, but no "CDarkSendPool::EnableHotColdMasterNode() - Enabled!" and I didn't show up on the list. But gonna give it another try after feeding the animals, LOL :)
 
TanteStefana said:
I'm gonna try some more. I have gotten a "masternode started" in my debug log, but no "CDarkSendPool::EnableHotColdMasterNode() - Enabled!" and I didn't show up on the list. But gonna give it another try after feeding the animals, LOL :)
Click to expand...
Have you checked ip address of remote node ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not sure if I should stop and restart my MN (remote/local setup). I have a flag :0 and I'm not showing up in the list http://tdrk.poolhash.org/blocks/masterlist.txt but I keep getting MN payments (I think I just received a back-to-back MN payment). Is this something that will help in troubleshooting a possible issue with the MN network? I can upload my debug.log if needed.
IP address of my MN is: "23.242.106.27:19999" : 0,
Code: 
{
"account" : "0",
"address" : "mnKjtxAsabarv2y2kb3sGyHz7rFEnm7Uu4",
"category" : "immature",
"amount" : 30.20000000,
"confirmations" : 11,
"generated" : true,
"blockhash" : "00000001c4e72bf6429c6d9f451d149deaea9127ea3d9c9757676abaa8634dce",
"blockindex" : 0,
"blocktime" : 1402281610,
"txid" : "33665233fc245709b74cb530fe18a13b3232d4374d44d335258a3ea82b56fb17",
"time" : 1402281610,
"timereceived" : 1402282010
},
{
"account" : "0",
"address" : "mnKjtxAsabarv2y2kb3sGyHz7rFEnm7Uu4",
"category" : "immature",
"amount" : 30.20000000,
"confirmations" : 10,
"generated" : true,
"blockhash" : "0000000207e487d2988b2a60e8e1457e1aeb1f0243f73ac25dcf0445e67f93ce",
"blockindex" : 0,
"blocktime" : 1402281676,
"txid" : "e92e062a84466362c35333595a05774f0a8613c12f31d334b5d3123856a3d55e",
"time" : 1402281676,
"timereceived" : 1402282010
}
]
 
Hello everyone, just jump in to the testnet and setup a Masternode. Would you please send me 1000DRK for the MN please?
mkRrX4Lg3nPeecTmsWdPpwCMMN9ViwUfu3
Thx in advanced.
 
Raico said:
Hello everyone, just jump in to the testnet and setup a Masternode. Would you please send me 1000DRK for the MN please?
mkRrX4Lg3nPeecTmsWdPpwCMMN9ViwUfu3
Thx in advanced.
Click to expand...
sent
darkcoind sendtoaddress mkRrX4Lg3nPeecTmsWdPpwCMMN9ViwUfu3 1000

79a1199e5246e024d2fe198510320aa660809ce89d12bf887462e6fd25307fd9
 
yidakee said:
Tante, I got cold/remote without issues on 10.9.6. Was without internet all day, so I'll update tomorrow.

On your local conf file, you do not need externalip=xx.xx.xx.xx
You only need masternodeaddr=REMOTE_IP:19999

Your remote conf looks fine to me, I think maxconnections=200 is only for pools? I use the regular 256, don't think would cause an issue though.

EDIT: just noticed you have "port=19999" - I dont have that on any of my conf file at all.

To test do

1) start remote darkcoind with "darkcoind" only, then
2) "darkcoind masternode debug" = error msg as described by Evan
3) start local wallet with only "darkcoind" then
4) "darkcoind masternode start" = should say "masternode started sucessfully" - if not something is wrong locally.
5) on remote "darkcoind masternode debug" - should now say "masternode started successfully"
6) shut off local wallet

Hope it helps
Click to expand...
Ok, this is how I originally did it BUT I was checking the debug log from my remote! It doesn't show up there! The message that remote/cold masternode is enabled happens on the LOCAL wallet. So if any of you are having trouble figuring it out, yah, that's how to do it, LOL. I will update my tutorial :)

I'm still not on the masternode list though, so until I see money dropping into my masternodes, I'll have to assume it's not working...

Also, I'm still wondering if you switch which masterkey you use, if you can control where the payments are made?

Ok, I'm on the list with one of my ip addresses, but it's my home IP not my remote IP address. I did turn both local wallets off, but my local IP is still running, which is weird. I can be chosen for a payment but I don't think my remote masternode is doing any work???
 
Last edited by a moderator:
chaeplin said:
sent
darkcoind sendtoaddress mkRrX4Lg3nPeecTmsWdPpwCMMN9ViwUfu3 1000

79a1199e5246e024d2fe198510320aa660809ce89d12bf887462e6fd25307fd9
Click to expand...
Received. Many thanks, Chaeplin :smile:
Code: 
successfully started masternode

{
    "version" : 100909,
    "protocolversion" : 70018,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 1000.00000000,
    "blocks" : 16442,
    "timeoffset" : -20,
    "connections" : 10,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 0.29831485,
    "testnet" : true,
    "keypoololdest" : 1402290413,
    "keypoolsize" : 100,
    "paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
    "mininput" : 0.00001000,
    "unlocked_until" : 0,
    "errors" : ""
}
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TanteStefana said:
Ok, this is how I originally did it BUT I was checking the debug log from my remote! It doesn't show up there! The message that remote/cold masternode is enabled happens on the LOCAL wallet. So if any of you are having trouble figuring it out, yah, that's how to do it, LOL. I will update my tutorial :)
Click to expand...
Hmm
please test this.
at local, add addnode=remoteip to conf.
check if remoteip is connected, getpeerinfo will show remoteip if connected.
after then, start masternode.
 
Code: 
2 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.10.9.4/",
4 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.10.9.9/",
1 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.9.4.11/",
1 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.9.5.8/",
3 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.9.5.9/",
This is connected peer's subver of my one node.
With this client subver distribution of testnet, it's more like testing in mainnet.
Fork is gone.
 
AlexGR said:
If someone hacks a client to show correct protocol version but has mismatching behavior (due to being different), can he sabotage the network?
Click to expand...
BUMP'ed after the hacked client exploit in payments.

Any assumption* that a client has for other clients (that they will perform as expected) should be fail-safed. Whether it is proper version reporting, network communication, payments, etc etc. The exact opposite assumption is the basis, that the other client will actually not be very cooperative or hacked / malicious.

* Flare could possibly spot such expectations/assumptions.
 
chaeplin said:
flare Is this yours ?
http://184.73.179.148:1234/block/00000001154167f62ee6b6742ba4133b4f59ccea78be8d808759ea948bf04f54
0.151 ? keke :sad:
Click to expand...
Ouch, I just was shocked when I checked my transactions.
Code: 
        "account" : "0",
        "address" : "mpKNkHEdgtxQAjTCkGB4ZwHAED74qwjDvj",
        "category" : "generate",
        "amount" : 0.15100000,
        "confirmations" : 338,
        "generated" : true,
        "blockhash" : "00000001154167f62ee6b6742ba4133b4f59ccea78be8d808759ea948bf04f54",
        "blockindex" : 0,
        "blocktime" : 1402241869,
        "txid" : "d0b2911887ce3315ca1afde797ddc60fb78b684fe5ae495b14c8f07c29b3352e",
        "time" : 1402241869,
        "timereceived" : 1402241872
Good to know this is being worked on. Is flare accepting donations?
 
vertoe said:
Good to know this is being worked on. Is flare accepting donations?
Click to expand...

Sure he is - my AWS instances for testnet are not running on water actually :smile:

Any donations welcome: XvKkW3NJFhTr9hcgbV8EQcGqbCCshDS8vj
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AlexGR said:
AlexGR said:
If someone hacks a client to show correct protocol version but has mismatching behavior (due to being different), can he sabotage the network?
Click to expand...

BUMP'ed after the hacked client exploit in payments.

Any assumption* that a client has for other clients (that they will perform as expected) should be fail-safed. Whether it is proper version reporting, network communication, payments, etc etc. The exact opposite assumption is the basis, that the other client will actually not be very cooperative or hacked / malicious.

* Flare could possibly spot such expectations/assumptions.
Click to expand...

Well spotted - i think that the log spam issues we have seen twice the last days have their root cause in misbehaving clients regarding protocol version. Taking into account that the issue was resolved by Evan by increasing the protocolversion i assume that manipulating the protocolverson might bring the issue back.

Testcase: Rent a AWS instance with 10GBit connection, modify the protocolversion to be one above the actual version (70018--> 70019) and see what happens to the MN network.

Expected behaviour: The network does not care at all.

Worstcase: This setup can stop the MN network due to massive CPU load on the MNs due to log spam.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
flare
fusecavator said:
I could be misunderstanding something, but it seems to me that it's very different than hashpower. Hashpower can be verified by walking through the blockchain from the beginning, regardless of what point in time the verification is done. For checking on whether a masternode is accessible and whether to vote on it, verification can only be done at that time, as nodes can move and go up and down. On top of that, different users' internet access will be through different ISPs, different firewalls, different filters, etc, so different legitimate users may have different views on what is and isn't accessible, so verification can't really be done at all. This seems to fit with the description in the OP which seems to indicate that only the blockfinders(usually pools) cast votes, and thus can simply vote however they choose. Unlike a normal 51% attack, improper blocks(ones without voting for anyone), will still get accepted and paid like normal, so a coordinated attack does not need to be made. If people use rigged clients that never vote they'll get paid normally if less than 51% of hashpower is on a rigged client, and they'll cut off masternode payments completely when 51% of hashpower is on rigged clients.

One possible solution could be to require a certain minimum amount of votes to be cast, otherwise the block is rejected. If a block must vote for more than half of the nodes it can vote for, it can avoid paying dead nodes, but would be unable to screw everyone. Rigged clients to prevent payments would still be possible, but they would only be able to prevent some rather than all.
Click to expand...

Source Development Update - 6/6/2014 - Masternode Payments
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top