As a separate issue, I now realize that current P2Pool doesn't allow *expressing* support for SegWit
Exactly. 
Topic: [1500 TH] p2pool: Decentralized, DoS-resistant, Hop-Proof pool - page 61. (Read 2591920 times)
March 25, 2017, 08:43:31 PM
Forrest, thank you very much for your support of our community.
March 25, 2017, 08:39:12 PM
Probably because the owner of p2pool.in does not support SegWit.
This is not a question, it's an inflammatory statement in line with the current community drama. I can't speak for Forrest or any other p2pool miner, but I'm 100% sure that this debates arena is not here, the only decentralized mining pools thread.
P2Pool by its nature is implementation agnostic, and while I have my own opinions, they will remain as such in the p2pool context because we are literary designed to give the p2pool miner their own node, and vote, whatever that preference may be.
March 25, 2017, 08:15:22 PM
Forrestv, can the fact that you did not include SegWit patches to the official repository be considered as an expression of your position?
This is a gross mis-characterization.
March 25, 2017, 06:51:18 PM
... However, I will continue to merge/develop, test, and release changes necessary to keep P2Pool working with any Bitcoin hardforks.
Many thanks Forrest! You're continued work on p2pool is very much appreciated.
March 25, 2017, 06:31:53 PM
Hi all. As windpath said, I'm not very active with Bitcoin recently. However, I will continue to merge/develop, test, and release changes necessary to keep P2Pool working with any Bitcoin hardforks.
There's an issue tracking SegWit support in P2Pool here which references veqtrus's awesome work adding SegWit support.
I don't plan to merge/test/release that until it looks like SegWit activation is actually happening, which according to http://segwit.co/, won't be in the near future.
As a separate issue, I now realize that current P2Pool doesn't allow *expressing* support for SegWit, due to line 372 in work.py, which veqtrus's changes don't touch:
If anyone can confirm that fixing that is as simple as changing it to
, then I will publish a new P2Pool release with that change.
There's an issue tracking SegWit support in P2Pool here which references veqtrus's awesome work adding SegWit support.
I don't plan to merge/test/release that until it looks like SegWit activation is actually happening, which according to http://segwit.co/, won't be in the near future.
As a separate issue, I now realize that current P2Pool doesn't allow *expressing* support for SegWit, due to line 372 in work.py, which veqtrus's changes don't touch:
Code:
version=max(self.current_work.value['version'], 0x20000000),
If anyone can confirm that fixing that is as simple as changing it to
Code:
version=max(self.current_work.value['version'], 0x20000002),
, then I will publish a new P2Pool release with that change.
March 25, 2017, 05:45:08 PM
thanks, sawa.
why is this not in p2pool.in? I thought that was the official site.
Probably because the owner of p2pool.in does not support SegWit.why is this not in p2pool.in? I thought that was the official site.
Forrestv, can the fact that you did not include SegWit patches to the official repository be considered as an expression of your position?
This is a gross mis-characterization. Forrest is not active in the bitcoin world any longer and I doubt he has an opinion either way. A patch has been written and the pull request is pending, but AFAIK no one has tested it. In the conversation on github Forrest asked when it would activate, however that is still a question that remains unanswered.
If SegWit is ready to activate I'm sure the code will be merged (after it's reviewed/tested), otherwise I would not expect a response from Forrest here.
Edit: as a side note p2pool nodes can signal for whatever client they prefer.
March 25, 2017, 11:54:38 AM
Where is v17 to download? that address still points to v16
I don't get it, where is v17
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17990237
2017-03-25 09:59:53.292243 p2pool (version 15.0-33-gf6a6ea0)
States version 15 on load ... does it switch to v17 when running? never bothered to bring it up that far as all variants I have found are 16 or pre-16
You have "version 15.0-33-gf6a6ea0", and it's a "Node p2pool version".
"Protocol version" must be 1700.
Here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17990237 is the instruction for those who already had a working p2pool installed from https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool.git
March 25, 2017, 11:03:50 AM
Where is v17 to download? that address still points to v16
I don't get it, where is v17
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17990237
2017-03-25 09:59:53.292243 p2pool (version 15.0-33-gf6a6ea0)
States version 15 on load ... does it switch to v17 when running? never bothered to bring it up that far as all variants I have found are 16 or pre-16
March 25, 2017, 04:20:38 AM
thanks, sawa.
why is this not in p2pool.in? I thought that was the official site.
Probably because the owner of p2pool.in does not support SegWit.why is this not in p2pool.in? I thought that was the official site.
Forrestv, can the fact that you did not include SegWit patches to the official repository be considered as an expression of your position?
March 25, 2017, 04:10:23 AM
thanks, sawa.
why is this not in p2pool.in? I thought that was the official site.
why is this not in p2pool.in? I thought that was the official site.
March 25, 2017, 04:04:24 AM
Where is v17 to download? that address still points to v16
I don't get it, where is v17
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17990237
March 25, 2017, 03:31:41 AM
I don't get it, where is v17
March 25, 2017, 03:31:04 AM
I don't see anyone with the majority of shares!
P2pool.org included!!!
P2pool.org included!!!
March 25, 2017, 03:29:08 AM
Where is v17 to download? that address still points to v16
March 25, 2017, 03:20:33 AM
March 24, 2017, 11:29:30 PM
v17 is getting majority shares?
March 14, 2017, 08:03:06 PM
I think veqtrus has a patch to implement inclusion of them though.
Not yet; I will go straight to P2WSH as P2SH will be considered deprecated. March 14, 2017, 07:07:52 PM
Isn't a 3xxxxx wallet address the format for one of the contenders for making a bigger block size? May be wrong but I dismember it being for BU.
Bitcoin addresses that start with a 3 are multisignature and have nothing to do with Bitcoin version, they are valid addresses.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Multisignature
March 08, 2017, 09:07:05 PM
Isn't a 3xxxxx wallet address the format for one of the contenders for making a bigger block size? May be wrong but I dismember it being for BU.
Bitcoin addresses that start with a 3 are multisignature and have nothing to do with Bitcoin version, they are valid addresses.https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Multisignature
March 08, 2017, 08:08:02 PM
Isn't a 3xxxxx wallet address the format for one of the contenders for making a bigger block size? May be wrong but I dismember it being for BU.
Bitcoin addresses that start with a 3 are multisignature and have nothing to do with Bitcoin version, they are valid addresses.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Multisignature
Jump to: