[ANN] Stratum mining protocol - ASIC ready - page 20.

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Quote from: DrHaribo on December 03, 2012, 07:28:55 PM

Didn't see this until now: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Stratum
Are all those RPC methods documented somewhere?

AFAIK docs is only there:
https://docs.google.com/a/palatinus.cz/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Al5UmiyYRxBudENwV2pVVmJsOEJMM1VnSDdHM0JhZlE#gid=0

There's reference implementation of some of them:
https://github.com/slush0/stratum-mining-proxy/blob/master/mining_libs/client_service.py

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

https://github.com/luke-jr/bfgminer/issues/186

Do we have any nice solution how to provide enough information for miners to inspect block templates, but prevent pool from overloading? As I see now, these two requirements are going against each other.

DrHaribo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1034

Needs more jiggawatts

Quote from: -ck on December 03, 2012, 04:54:35 AM

I'd say just drop the connection since that would mandate they try to reauthorise.

Yeah, will do that.

Didn't see this until now: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Stratum

Are all those RPC methods documented somewhere?

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: DrHaribo on December 03, 2012, 04:53:02 AM

What would be recommended server behavior in the case that, after authentication, a worker's credentials are no longer valid. For instance due to the password changing, the worker being deleted, the user being banned or the user account deleted.

And does it make sense to implement more commands than the ones in the docs at bitcoin.cz?

I'd say just drop the connection since that would mandate they try to reauthorise.

DrHaribo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1034

Needs more jiggawatts

What would be recommended server behavior in the case that, after authentication, a worker's credentials are no longer valid. For instance due to the password changing, the worker being deleted, the user being banned or the user account deleted.

And does it make sense to implement more commands than the ones in the docs at bitcoin.cz?

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Stratum proxy 1.2.0 has been released. Changelog:

* Fixes major bug in C extension for calculating midstate (thanks verement for bug report & pull request).
* Fixes network issues - proxy now actively reconnects after two minutes of pool inactivity (also disconnect miners to indicate connection issues).
* Fixes get_version message.

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Thanks ckolivas, good to know.

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: slush on December 02, 2012, 07:25:09 AM

Quote from: DrHaribo on December 01, 2012, 02:38:37 PM

So current miners try GBT first, and if it has a Stratum HTTP header they switch to Stratum.

I have no idea how it works with GBT in miners. That X-Stratum is for getwork protocol...

GBT is all done in http so the headers can just as easily contain x-stratum as getwork does, and cgminer will still switch to stratum if it finds the header in gbt comms.

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Quote from: DrHaribo on December 01, 2012, 02:38:37 PM

So current miners try GBT first, and if it has a Stratum HTTP header they switch to Stratum.

I have no idea how it works with GBT in miners. That X-Stratum is for getwork protocol...

DrHaribo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1034

Needs more jiggawatts

Currently testing Stratum at BitMinter: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1372864

DrHaribo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1034

Needs more jiggawatts

Quote from: slush on December 01, 2012, 07:45:57 AM

I edited bitcoin.it wiki: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork

Thanks

So current miners try GBT first, and if it has a Stratum HTTP header they switch to Stratum. If GBT fails completely they switch to getwork, which could also have a Stratum header, but that is never looked at if GBT is supported.

If you implement both GBT and Stratum, the server will decide the default by including a Stratum HTTP header in GBT responses or not.

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

I edited bitcoin.it wiki: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Quote from: DrHaribo on December 01, 2012, 06:49:01 AM

Is the X-Stratum HTTP header documented somewhere?

I don't think so. It should be "getwork extension", but I'm not aware of any process how to "standardize it". Maybe just edit wiki? :-)

Quote

What should be the contents?

stratum+tcp://url:port

Quote

How should it be interpreted by miners? As "stratum is there, if you want it" or "stratum is there, switch to that"

Existing miners (cgminer, poclbm) implement it as "Stratum is there, switch to that". Thanks to this, users (who don't understand difference between getwork/stratum) don't need to change anything in their config, just update miner.

DrHaribo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1034

Needs more jiggawatts

Is the X-Stratum HTTP header documented somewhere?

What should be the contents?

How should it be interpreted by miners? As "stratum is there, if you want it" or "stratum is there, switch to that"

DrHaribo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1034

Needs more jiggawatts

Thanks, Slush. Just in time for my server implementation Grin

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

I just changed "official" documentation of Stratum protocol at https://mining.bitcoin.cz/stratum-mining to reflect recent discussion about changing the difficulty.

Specifically I added following sentence to chapter "Server can occasionally ask miner to change share difficulty":

Quote

This means that difficulty 2 will be applied to every next job received from the server.

Although I understand this is not breath-taking and verbose explanation, it is basically enough to fix recently discussed issues about difficulty changes.

Reasoning for this change is described here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1344456 and this change is backward compatible with all existing mining software (cgminer, proxy, poclbm). It should be also compatible with existing pool implementations (at least with BtcGuild implementation, and I'm not aware of any reason why it should break other implementations), so it is up to poolops if their Stratum pools will gain from this change.

antirack

hero member

Activity: 489

Merit: 500

Immersionist

I am on Ubuntu.

It works now, for some reason it only works directly in a bash shell but not in a GNU Screen session.

beekeeper

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

LTC

python on win7 64 bits have the same issue with redirections.

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Hm, proxy is writing to stdout and errout, no idea why redirection does not work for you...

antirack

hero member

Activity: 489

Merit: 500

Immersionist

Both are still writing to the screen.

the proxy is up and running for a few weeks if not longer, but I have some random connectivity problems in my miners logs so I wanted to see if I can find anything on the proxy's end during the time it happens.

I have a network monitoring program running for a few days now, with no problems recorded at all. So I am ruling out network problems in my LAN for the moment.

The errors range from 'read timeout' to 'connection refused' (the miner talking to the proxy). And it happens a couple of times a day.

Having the proxy log would definitely be helpful.

Topic: [ANN] Stratum mining protocol - ASIC ready - page 20. (Read 146166 times)