again stuck bitcoin withdrawals since more than 2 hours ....
it's not funny =(
Topic: [ANN] KRAKEN.COM - Exchange with USD EUR GBP JPY CAD BTC LTC XRP NMC XDG STR ETH - page 241. (Read 628889 times)
August 16, 2014, 04:27:29 PM
August 16, 2014, 03:04:37 PM
I wrote some code which queries my ledger every 5 seconds and at the second call I get the following error: "EAPI:Invalid key"
What's the problem? I am Tier 3...
Thanks,
garan
What's the problem? I am Tier 3...
Thanks,
garan
Hi garan - if you haven't done this already, please make a support ticket for this and we can assist you.
In fact this won't be necessary, my code was the problem... part of it is written in C and I had forgotten a few free() which would result in a wrong HMAC hash the second time...
August 16, 2014, 12:54:52 PM
I wrote some code which queries my ledger every 5 seconds and at the second call I get the following error: "EAPI:Invalid key"
What's the problem? I am Tier 3...
Thanks,
garan
What's the problem? I am Tier 3...
Thanks,
garan
Hi garan - if you haven't done this already, please make a support ticket for this and we can assist you.
August 16, 2014, 12:53:51 PM
New API Rate: The API rate limit has been increased for account Tiers 1-3 Edit: Tier 3.
Old rate: 1 call every 5 seconds with a burst of 10.
New rate: 1 call every 3 seconds with a burst of 15.
The details, in terms of the count system for the rate limit, are as follows (changes in bold):
Max count before lockout: 15 (lockout is for 15 minutes)
Count increment for order add/cancel calls: +0
Count increment for ledger/trade history calls: +2
Count increment for all other calls: +1
Count reduced by 1 every: 3 seconds
thanks for update, I assume that things marked as strong are the one updated.Old rate: 1 call every 5 seconds with a burst of 10.
New rate: 1 call every 3 seconds with a burst of 15.
The details, in terms of the count system for the rate limit, are as follows (changes in bold):
Max count before lockout: 15 (lockout is for 15 minutes)
Count increment for order add/cancel calls: +0
Count increment for ledger/trade history calls: +2
Count increment for all other calls: +1
Count reduced by 1 every: 3 seconds
I would suggest also to write a simple conclusion, what is safe (not considering burst etc.) interval for trades and for other calls.
trades/ledger calls: 6s (reduced from 10s)
add/cancel calls: 0s (didn't remember how it was before)
other calls: 3s (reduced from 5s)
correct me if I'm wrong.
I believe this is the way how most of (at least not only kraken specific) trading engines will process interval parameters.
Yes, the part marked as strong indicates the change for Tier 3.
What would be "safe" is also as you indicated (but you can "burst" to a higher rate so long as your count doesn't go above 15). So, the "safe" levels are:
add/cancels calls: no API rate limit.
ledger/trades history calls: 1 call every 6 seconds.
other calls: 1 call every 3 seconds.
But of course doing both a ledger/trades call and an "other" call in a 6 second interval would advance your count, so wouldn't be sustainable indefinitely and not "safe" in this sense.
August 16, 2014, 10:38:01 AM
I wrote some code which queries my ledger every 5 seconds and at the second call I get the following error: "EAPI:Invalid key"
What's the problem? I am Tier 3...
Thanks,
garan
What's the problem? I am Tier 3...
Thanks,
garan
August 16, 2014, 01:04:42 AM
New API Rate: The API rate limit has been increased for account Tiers 1-3 Edit: Tier 3.
Old rate: 1 call every 5 seconds with a burst of 10.
New rate: 1 call every 3 seconds with a burst of 15.
The details, in terms of the count system for the rate limit, are as follows (changes in bold):
Max count before lockout: 15 (lockout is for 15 minutes)
Count increment for order add/cancel calls: +0
Count increment for ledger/trade history calls: +2
Count increment for all other calls: +1
Count reduced by 1 every: 3 seconds
thanks for update, I assume that things marked as strong are the one updated.Old rate: 1 call every 5 seconds with a burst of 10.
New rate: 1 call every 3 seconds with a burst of 15.
The details, in terms of the count system for the rate limit, are as follows (changes in bold):
Max count before lockout: 15 (lockout is for 15 minutes)
Count increment for order add/cancel calls: +0
Count increment for ledger/trade history calls: +2
Count increment for all other calls: +1
Count reduced by 1 every: 3 seconds
I would suggest also to write a simple conclusion, what is safe (not considering burst etc.) interval for trades and for other calls.
trades/ledger calls: 6s (reduced from 10s)
add/cancel calls: 0s (didn't remember how it was before)
other calls: 3s (reduced from 5s)
correct me if I'm wrong.
I believe this is the way how most of (at least not only kraken specific) trading engines will process interval parameters.
August 15, 2014, 06:20:42 PM
Hey, i already opened a ticket. I'm just kinda afraid BTC might drop and i won't be able to trade my BTC in time 
OK - you can PM me your ticket number if you'd like my assistance.
August 15, 2014, 06:14:10 PM
Hey, i already opened a ticket. I'm just kinda afraid BTC might drop and i won't be able to trade my BTC in time
August 15, 2014, 05:43:28 PM
I just deposited 1.7 BTC in my account and it's still not showing up. The transaction has 10 confirmations now. Is there something wrong with BTC deposit ?
Regards
Regards
Hi marlowe - please make a ticket for this so we can assist you. I'm not aware of any general issue with BTC deposits, so it may be an issue specific to your account.
August 15, 2014, 05:23:35 PM
I just deposited 1.7 BTC in my account and it's still not showing up. The transaction has 10 confirmations now. Is there something wrong with BTC deposit ?
Regards
Regards
August 15, 2014, 01:23:34 PM
New API Rate: The API rate limit has been increased for account Tiers 1-3 Edit: Tier 3.
Old rate: 1 call every 5 seconds with a burst of 10.
New rate: 1 call every 3 seconds with a burst of 15.
The details, in terms of the count system for the rate limit, are as follows (changes in bold):
Max count before lockout: 15 (lockout is for 15 minutes)
Count increment for order add/cancel calls: +0
Count increment for ledger/trade history calls: +2
Count increment for all other calls: +1
Count reduced by 1 every: 3 seconds
Old rate: 1 call every 5 seconds with a burst of 10.
New rate: 1 call every 3 seconds with a burst of 15.
The details, in terms of the count system for the rate limit, are as follows (changes in bold):
Max count before lockout: 15 (lockout is for 15 minutes)
Count increment for order add/cancel calls: +0
Count increment for ledger/trade history calls: +2
Count increment for all other calls: +1
Count reduced by 1 every: 3 seconds
Note edit above - rate limit increase is for Tier 3 only. The rate limit for Tier 1-2 is the same as before (1 call every 5 seconds with a burst of 10 - i.e. the max count is 10 and the count is reduced by 1 every 5 seconds).
August 15, 2014, 08:08:38 AM
New API Rate: The API rate limit has been increased for account Tiers 1-3 Edit: Tier 3.
Old rate: 1 call every 5 seconds with a burst of 10.
New rate: 1 call every 3 seconds with a burst of 15.
The details, in terms of the count system for the rate limit, are as follows (changes in bold):
Max count before lockout: 15 (lockout is for 15 minutes)
Count increment for order add/cancel calls: +0
Count increment for ledger/trade history calls: +2
Count increment for all other calls: +1
Count reduced by 1 every: 3 seconds
Old rate: 1 call every 5 seconds with a burst of 10.
New rate: 1 call every 3 seconds with a burst of 15.
The details, in terms of the count system for the rate limit, are as follows (changes in bold):
Max count before lockout: 15 (lockout is for 15 minutes)
Count increment for order add/cancel calls: +0
Count increment for ledger/trade history calls: +2
Count increment for all other calls: +1
Count reduced by 1 every: 3 seconds
August 15, 2014, 07:42:22 AM
Oк, Dargo!
Well, as it can take a lot of time?
Approximately what date will be known to the query result?
Well, as it can take a lot of time?
Approximately what date will be known to the query result?
Hi Fixx - good news. An internal search by Fidor showed that your wire was never sent (because it didn't have your name on it). So, Fidor will send the wire on Monday 8/4 and you should have it in your account within 5 business days after that. Obviously it shouldn't have taken so long to find it, but what happened is that the search process got stuck in the step of trying to contact your bank (Fidor sent a SWIFT message and was waiting to hear back). We've noticed that a lot of cases get stuck this way, and a variety of avenues need to be explored in every case (rather than just sending a SWIFT message), so we've been working with Fidor on trying other approaches to make progress. We're still developing the new procedures, but already we're getting more cases solved more quickly. Again, I'm very sorry for the delay with your transfer, but I think we've got it sorted out now. It won't truly be solved till you have your money, though, and that will take a bit longer.
5 business days had passed - where's my money !?
Hi Fixx - yes, you should have it by now. I'm checking to confirm the date it was sent and I'll let you know as soon as I hear back on this.
Fixx confirmed by PM that he has his payment now.
August 13, 2014, 11:05:32 PM
Hey Dargo, again stuck bitcoin withdrawal =/ (the last ~15 hours everything was fine)
edit: 2 hours later it has been sent.
edit: 2 hours later it has been sent.
August 13, 2014, 12:29:48 PM
Oк, Dargo!
Well, as it can take a lot of time?
Approximately what date will be known to the query result?
Well, as it can take a lot of time?
Approximately what date will be known to the query result?
Hi Fixx - good news. An internal search by Fidor showed that your wire was never sent (because it didn't have your name on it). So, Fidor will send the wire on Monday 8/4 and you should have it in your account within 5 business days after that. Obviously it shouldn't have taken so long to find it, but what happened is that the search process got stuck in the step of trying to contact your bank (Fidor sent a SWIFT message and was waiting to hear back). We've noticed that a lot of cases get stuck this way, and a variety of avenues need to be explored in every case (rather than just sending a SWIFT message), so we've been working with Fidor on trying other approaches to make progress. We're still developing the new procedures, but already we're getting more cases solved more quickly. Again, I'm very sorry for the delay with your transfer, but I think we've got it sorted out now. It won't truly be solved till you have your money, though, and that will take a bit longer.
5 business days had passed - where's my money !?
Hi Fixx - yes, you should have it by now. I'm checking to confirm the date it was sent and I'll let you know as soon as I hear back on this.
August 13, 2014, 04:35:07 AM
Oк, Dargo!
Well, as it can take a lot of time?
Approximately what date will be known to the query result?
Well, as it can take a lot of time?
Approximately what date will be known to the query result?
Hi Fixx - good news. An internal search by Fidor showed that your wire was never sent (because it didn't have your name on it). So, Fidor will send the wire on Monday 8/4 and you should have it in your account within 5 business days after that. Obviously it shouldn't have taken so long to find it, but what happened is that the search process got stuck in the step of trying to contact your bank (Fidor sent a SWIFT message and was waiting to hear back). We've noticed that a lot of cases get stuck this way, and a variety of avenues need to be explored in every case (rather than just sending a SWIFT message), so we've been working with Fidor on trying other approaches to make progress. We're still developing the new procedures, but already we're getting more cases solved more quickly. Again, I'm very sorry for the delay with your transfer, but I think we've got it sorted out now. It won't truly be solved till you have your money, though, and that will take a bit longer.
5 business days had passed - where's my money !?
August 12, 2014, 06:36:02 PM
The issue with stuck bitcoin withdrawals should be fixed now, but please let us know if you are still having a problem.
Hi Dargo,what are the technical reasons of these issues? I read that it happened frequently.... I'm worried about this situation.
Hi kitano - sorry it took a little while to get back to you, but I wanted to check with the dev team on this. It don't think it's been very frequent, but recently it does seem like it's been a bit more frequent. There's no security concern, but of course the delays are inconvenient. I have to be very vague because we are paranoid about security and don't like to give any details about our infrastructure. We have a bunch of security protocols that protect our withdrawal services. This can create two problems. First, we sometimes trip over our own security wires when we're working on the site. Second, the security measures can sometimes make the withdrawal services a bit unstable (leading to the stuck withdrawals). This second thing has been a bit more frequent lately and we are looking into it now to find the reason. We of course want withdrawals to be as reliable as possible, but we are also very security conscious and are willing to sacrifice a bit of reliability for enhanced security. We are working to get to the point where there's no trade-off at all. Maximum security and reliability is our goal. I know this is vague, but I hope it helps.
August 11, 2014, 07:10:51 PM
.. seriously, why cant you just be honest, and admit that you want more money, you have identified how to do it based on current usage, and where you want to target customers. Really poor attitude from Kraken and their new approach to 'valued customers'.
We must have a misunderstanding here, because this is exactly what I've been trying to say. We need a more money because the current fees don't provide enough income to sustain our business. We've looked at our current usage to identify the best way to change the fee structure. Since we need to increase the fees by a factor of 2, the fees for most users are going up by that amount. The exception is at the lowest fee tiers, because, given our usage, there wasn't any advantage to doubling the fees at these tiers. So, instead of starting with a lowest fee of 0.4% (which would double the current fee of 0.2%), we went instead with 0.35%. I don't see how these reasons reflect a poor attitude toward our customers. We're not doing anyone a favor by offering our services at a price that isn't sustainable, and we're not disrespecting people by charging sufficient fees to cover our costs.
There is no misunderstanding as to your motives (its clear you need money) - however there is an email from your company that attempts to portray this increase in fees as being 'good for valued customers', there is a sightly confused post on your website which speaks of simplification while adding complication via FEE credits, there is a seriously huge increase in your charges, and an attempt to rub some vaseline on the butts of existing customers so they smile while getting shafted.
I hate to say it, but its also bad timing to do this, while there are people reporting problems with your platform in terms of withdrawals.
I am in complete agreement with you on the content of the email. It ignored the fee increase entirely and came off as cheap marketing-speak. ICFielder was the first to point this out and as I said in my reply to him, I've raised this issue with our team and will do everything I can to prevent this type of email in the future.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8223658
August 11, 2014, 06:02:15 PM
.. seriously, why cant you just be honest, and admit that you want more money, you have identified how to do it based on current usage, and where you want to target customers. Really poor attitude from Kraken and their new approach to 'valued customers'.
We must have a misunderstanding here, because this is exactly what I've been trying to say. We need a more money because the current fees don't provide enough income to sustain our business. We've looked at our current usage to identify the best way to change the fee structure. Since we need to increase the fees by a factor of 2, the fees for most users are going up by that amount. The exception is at the lowest fee tiers, because, given our usage, there wasn't any advantage to doubling the fees at these tiers. So, instead of starting with a lowest fee of 0.4% (which would double the current fee of 0.2%), we went instead with 0.35%. I don't see how these reasons reflect a poor attitude toward our customers. We're not doing anyone a favor by offering our services at a price that isn't sustainable, and we're not disrespecting people by charging sufficient fees to cover our costs.
August 11, 2014, 01:48:38 PM
Hi Perambulator - I don't know how you got this message. There's no sense in which the explanation for the new fee structure is that 'we aren't interested in the small guys.' Rather, I was explaining why the fee increase isn't as large for the small guys - how does that add up to not caring about them? When I said this,
perhaps I should have added that the reason we felt it was more important to have the highest fee start a bit lower is precisely because of our concern for the small guy.
Edit: perhaps you thought the 80/20 rule I mentioned was a target we were shooting for. If so, that's not the case. It was just a statement of fact about our volume profile. We didn't in any way intend this, it just turns out that the majority of volume is created by a minority of traders. My guess is that it's about the same on most exchanges. That's why it's become a rule, because it has been found to hold across most markets.
We wouldn't gain much by raising our highest fee to 0.4% over 0.35% and we thought it was more important to have the highest fee start a bit lower.
perhaps I should have added that the reason we felt it was more important to have the highest fee start a bit lower is precisely because of our concern for the small guy.
Edit: perhaps you thought the 80/20 rule I mentioned was a target we were shooting for. If so, that's not the case. It was just a statement of fact about our volume profile. We didn't in any way intend this, it just turns out that the majority of volume is created by a minority of traders. My guess is that it's about the same on most exchanges. That's why it's become a rule, because it has been found to hold across most markets.
Actually it was a combination of the fact that not only have you increased fees, you have dramatically increased the level of volume required to achieve a more advantageous fee..
As an example, I currently trade a little over $50,000, and my fee rate is 0.14%. Under your new terms, I will be charged more than double, at 0.29%. In order to attain a comparable fee schedule of 0.14%, I would have to increase my trade volume from $50,000 to $700,000. That is just incredible, and I don't see how this matches your claim to still be interested in the little guy (and personally I think 50,000$ is not a small amount!)
Thanks for the clarification Perambulator. I'm not sure $50,000 a month in volume is such a small amount.
But either way, we aren't singling out traders in the range you trade for particularly high fees. Even those who trade over a million USD per month will see an increase from 0.05% to 0.1% - also double the rate. The current fee schedule was intended from the start to be a deeply discounted rate. It was discounted by about 50%, so we needed to double fees in order to have a more sustainable fee structure. So just about everyone will see their rate double, in some cases a bit more than double. The one exception to this is the rate for very low volume levels. The rate for the lowest volume level isn't doubling (going from 0.2% to 0.35%). The reason for this, as I've said, is that there was really no benefit to doubling the fee at this lower range, so we decided to start the fee a bit lower than double at the lowest volume tier. Jump to: