I expect that what we need to know is what sequence of four bytes they changed the handshake to.
It makes sense that they changed it, because the older version - the source code - used the exact same handshake bytes as bitcoin does, meaning it would actually connect to all the bitcoin daemons whose addresses it would have gotten from DNS and so on, and actually try to fit their blocks into its blockchain, and actually send bitcoin daemons its blocks and so on.
So it makes perfect sense they will have changed the handshake. The very first attempts to make GRouPcoin/DeVCoin we realised that had to be changed. I have changed it in this test of trying to implement proper merged mining, I changed it the way I have in other altcoins, a way that makes it easy for a human watching the packets to see at a glance which chains are trying to talk to each other: I am using "RUC:" for main net and "ruc-" for test net, just like GRouPcoin uses "GRP:" and "grp-", DeVCoin uses "DVC:" and "dvc-" and so on.
Once we are sure it works we can always change the handshake to whatever they want to use going forward; I didn't have any qualms about changing it since it is obvious from the fact their new proprietary version also changed it thus that going forward it is not going to be the same as bitcoin's handshake like it was in the 0.4 version the source code is for.
If you are into wireshark or ethernet sniffing or whatever, maybe for you it is trivial to find out what four byte sequence their new version does use, in which case we can easily adapt. And since I do provide source code, you can easily adapt it yourself to check that it really is using the bytes you think it is using.
-MarkM-
Topic: [ANNOUNCE] RuCoin - Russian alternate cryptocurrency - exchange is up already! - page 8. (Read 34417 times)
March 13, 2012, 05:42:09 PM
March 13, 2012, 03:44:10 PM
Obviously the open sourced version but it's not up to me to decide.
I'm waiting to see if the forums on the rucoin site come back to see what it says there about the two versions. Its possible that the binary versions are still being worked on and the source may come out soon. The 5.x binaries on the site were put there sometime in the last 2 months.
I'm waiting to see if the forums on the rucoin site come back to see what it says there about the two versions. Its possible that the binary versions are still being worked on and the source may come out soon. The 5.x binaries on the site were put there sometime in the last 2 months.
March 13, 2012, 02:07:22 PM
Well from the look/sound of it, one is an open source branch the other is a closed-source / proprietary fork.
Which do you want to work with, open source cryptocurrencies or proprietary ones?
-MarkM-
Which do you want to work with, open source cryptocurrencies or proprietary ones?
-MarkM-
March 13, 2012, 01:33:50 PM
Here's what I'm trying to figure out:
Client 4.x does not connect to client 5.x.
Sources on the site are 4.x (which I'm guessing is the source you've modified), binaries on the author's site are 5.x.
Since 4.x clients can't connect to 5.x clients, doesn't that essentially make 5.x clients a new fork of the chain? The 5.x clients will never see what 4.x clients do unless the author has a bridge to link the two somehow...
If your code is based on the 4.x client then I'm guessing it works with the author's 4.x clients. Which is the correct fork - 4.x or 5.x?
If you do port it to 6.x code you'd have to figure out which official client it's compatible with.
But that leaves the question of: Which fork is the (author supported) official client?
I'd run some tests with transactions but I don't have any RUC to send around for testing.
Client 4.x does not connect to client 5.x.
Sources on the site are 4.x (which I'm guessing is the source you've modified), binaries on the author's site are 5.x.
Since 4.x clients can't connect to 5.x clients, doesn't that essentially make 5.x clients a new fork of the chain? The 5.x clients will never see what 4.x clients do unless the author has a bridge to link the two somehow...
If your code is based on the 4.x client then I'm guessing it works with the author's 4.x clients. Which is the correct fork - 4.x or 5.x?
If you do port it to 6.x code you'd have to figure out which official client it's compatible with.
But that leaves the question of: Which fork is the (author supported) official client?
I'd run some tests with transactions but I don't have any RUC to send around for testing.
March 13, 2012, 12:36:08 PM
Mine is based on the only one that had source code available.
DIdn't I mention that if you don't get connections please private message me your IP address so I can use -addnode to have mine reach out to you because I have no incoming ports? If you too have no incoming ports oops no go. But if you do have incoming ports yet others are not reaching out to you once they see you in the IRC channel, this method of having others add your IP using -addnode can work around that.
Once I make sure it works, I can build based on Bitcoin 0.6 code (master branch at github) to bring it nicely up to date.
-MarkM-
DIdn't I mention that if you don't get connections please private message me your IP address so I can use -addnode to have mine reach out to you because I have no incoming ports? If you too have no incoming ports oops no go. But if you do have incoming ports yet others are not reaching out to you once they see you in the IRC channel, this method of having others add your IP using -addnode can work around that.
Once I make sure it works, I can build based on Bitcoin 0.6 code (master branch at github) to bring it nicely up to date.
-MarkM-
March 13, 2012, 12:13:39 PM
Shows 1 connection for about 30 seconds, then 0 connections. Doesn't download any blocks either.
Sounds like the same behavior I saw where a 4.x client was connecting to a 5.x client. They're incompatible with each other and drop showing 0. After awhile though, my 5.x clients did find other 5.x clients on the internet to connect to and held those connections.
Which version is markm's build based on?
March 13, 2012, 11:59:01 AM
Shows 1 connection for about 30 seconds, then 0 connections. Doesn't download any blocks either.
March 13, 2012, 09:13:11 AM
All we need is the developer to accept this "new" version and a merged mining pool supporting it.
Well lets make sure it works first. I do not see any additional connections yet, how many connections do you have?
-MarkM-
March 13, 2012, 04:06:53 AM
All we need is the developer to accept this "new" version and a merged mining pool supporting it.
March 09, 2012, 04:47:01 PM
Okay, I have made a version that has merged mining enabled. I based it on GRouPcoin code, so it also includes the BIP-30 patch.
It is at https://sourceforge.net/projects/galacticmilieu/upload/RUCoin/
If you don't get connections, make sure you have incoming port (default is 8883) open and private message me your IP address and I will add you with -addnode.
-MarkM-
EDIT: Oops, minor glitch, I forgot to change its aux-chain=ID to 0x0007. Done now and re-uploaded.
It is at https://sourceforge.net/projects/galacticmilieu/upload/RUCoin/
If you don't get connections, make sure you have incoming port (default is 8883) open and private message me your IP address and I will add you with -addnode.
-MarkM-
EDIT: Oops, minor glitch, I forgot to change its aux-chain=ID to 0x0007. Done now and re-uploaded.
March 08, 2012, 06:43:12 PM
Sounds like they "enabled" one-sided merged-mining simply by hacking the next-gen Bitcoin.
It is pretty trivial, just change the visible to user occurences of the word bitcoin, optionally, if you happen to care at all about such cosmetics, its the hardest part of the whole hack so why bother, and change the handshake bytes (if they even bothered to do that or even realised such a thing exists) and the IRC channel (and optionally IRCserver/network), the genesis block, the genesis block hash check asserts, and the default port numbers.
I have done it umpteen times in the process of prototyping and testing Britcoin, Botcoin, Canadian Digital Notes, CZech Bitcash, GMC, GRF, UNS and so on and so on.
Since bitcoin still only has one-sided merged mining, they inherited that. They didn't bother to apply the merged mining patches used to make namecoin, devcoin, groupcoin, ixcoin, botcoin, britcoin, etc etc etc able to be auxiliary chains.
As civilisations calling themselves Russians have been reported/encountered in the Galactic Milieu I don't see a puny two million premine as much of a problem, most nations pre-mine all their coins, I guess in Freeciv terms the government type of these Russians might be "Communism", it seems very socialist of them to kindly share most of the coins with others instead of hoarding the whole lot in their "central bank".
Unfortunately only having such a small amount of their currency in their own hands would somewhat restrict their ability to buy into all the other nations' currencies on the kind of scale the other nations have been accustomed to but hey, maybe they can spin it as the other nations being capitalist pigs not real democracies at all...
One might as well start one's hacking from the very latest Bitcoin code, so as to include the BIP-30 security fix for example. I wonder if multicoin is that up to date, maybe multicoin would be the easiest way to get up and running?
-MarkM-
It is pretty trivial, just change the visible to user occurences of the word bitcoin, optionally, if you happen to care at all about such cosmetics, its the hardest part of the whole hack so why bother, and change the handshake bytes (if they even bothered to do that or even realised such a thing exists) and the IRC channel (and optionally IRCserver/network), the genesis block, the genesis block hash check asserts, and the default port numbers.
I have done it umpteen times in the process of prototyping and testing Britcoin, Botcoin, Canadian Digital Notes, CZech Bitcash, GMC, GRF, UNS and so on and so on.
Since bitcoin still only has one-sided merged mining, they inherited that. They didn't bother to apply the merged mining patches used to make namecoin, devcoin, groupcoin, ixcoin, botcoin, britcoin, etc etc etc able to be auxiliary chains.
As civilisations calling themselves Russians have been reported/encountered in the Galactic Milieu I don't see a puny two million premine as much of a problem, most nations pre-mine all their coins, I guess in Freeciv terms the government type of these Russians might be "Communism", it seems very socialist of them to kindly share most of the coins with others instead of hoarding the whole lot in their "central bank".
Unfortunately only having such a small amount of their currency in their own hands would somewhat restrict their ability to buy into all the other nations' currencies on the kind of scale the other nations have been accustomed to but hey, maybe they can spin it as the other nations being capitalist pigs not real democracies at all...
One might as well start one's hacking from the very latest Bitcoin code, so as to include the BIP-30 security fix for example. I wonder if multicoin is that up to date, maybe multicoin would be the easiest way to get up and running?
-MarkM-
March 08, 2012, 01:38:19 PM
Guess I should have left it running a bit longer... 
It also appears that the 4.x and 5.x clients are not compatible with each other and won't connect. (addnode= line on a 4.x client to a 5.x client will drop after a few seconds)
It also appears that the 4.x and 5.x clients are not compatible with each other and won't connect. (addnode= line on a 4.x client to a 5.x client will drop after a few seconds)
Code:
fred@funkylinux29:~/apps$ ./clients/rucoind getauxblock
{
"target" : "000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000d0a1240000000000",
"hash" : "4ff534fd200fc34b9fca24dd95556b65c2d58d1b5b0ab3d44a045191f4e1b8e7",
"chainid" : 7
}
March 08, 2012, 01:35:56 PM
It looks like the binaries on the download site are built on 5.x code and do support merged mining (I think). The problem is, the 5.x binaries don't seem to connect to anything. The source code on the site hasn't been updated.
Code:
fred@funkylinux29:~/apps$ ./clients/rucoind getauxblock
error: {"code":-9,"message":"RuCoin is not connected!"}
fred@funkylinux29:~/apps$ ./clients/rucoind getinfo
{
"version" : 50200,
"edition" : "2.1-892",
"balance" : 0.00000000,
"blocks" : 17278,
"connections" : 0,
"proxy" : "",
"generate" : false,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"difficulty" : 1789.00569829,
"hashespersec" : 0,
"testnet" : false,
"keypoololdest" : 1328304975,
"keypoolsize" : 101,
"paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
"errors" : ""
}
March 07, 2012, 07:12:59 AM
I didn't think anyone had ever claimed it could be merged-mined? Otherwise I would be merged-mining it.
No point hacking it to add merged mining though, might as well instead wait for someone to put the merged mining patches into a very recent version of bitcoin to make a new updated version of some existing merged-mined coin then clone that to make umpteen new currencies that can be merged mined so we can really put merged mining to a stress-test of just how many chains we can merged-mine at once.
If no one updates a merged mined currency to latest bitcoin standards in some undetermined amount of time I will likely do it myself, probably to GRouPcoin as traditionally it is the one for prototyping/testing new stuff with, then use that to make afresh the UKB, CDN, UNS, GMC, GRF etc etc family of chains.
-MarkM-
EDIT: Or oh heck why not, maybe I will add merged mining to it for them for a 2 million RUC bounty, silly to have all that premine set aside for bounty and not use it eh?
No point hacking it to add merged mining though, might as well instead wait for someone to put the merged mining patches into a very recent version of bitcoin to make a new updated version of some existing merged-mined coin then clone that to make umpteen new currencies that can be merged mined so we can really put merged mining to a stress-test of just how many chains we can merged-mine at once.
If no one updates a merged mined currency to latest bitcoin standards in some undetermined amount of time I will likely do it myself, probably to GRouPcoin as traditionally it is the one for prototyping/testing new stuff with, then use that to make afresh the UKB, CDN, UNS, GMC, GRF etc etc family of chains.
-MarkM-
EDIT: Or oh heck why not, maybe I will add merged mining to it for them for a 2 million RUC bounty, silly to have all that premine set aside for bounty and not use it eh?
March 07, 2012, 04:51:12 AM
Seems not working...
It supports merged mining alongside with Bitcoins?!
Seems not?!
Thanks!
Thiago
Code:
./rucoin-0.4.0.1/src/rucoind getconnectioncount
0
It supports merged mining alongside with Bitcoins?!
Code:
./rucoin-0.4.0.1/src/rucoind getauxblock
error: {"code":-32601,"message":"Method not found"}
Seems not?!
Thanks!
Thiago
January 27, 2012, 12:37:21 PM
Quote
Anyway could u plz post here data that prove premined qty of coins? And a way how this data could be obtained.
You can download source codehttps://www.rucoin.org/rucoin-0.401.tar.gz
and see this in GetBlockValue function:
Quote
int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees)
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
if (nHeight == 1)
nSubsidy = 2000000 * COIN;
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
if (nHeight == 1)
nSubsidy = 2000000 * COIN;
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
Btw, they could change the code from "20000000000000000 * COIN;" to "2000000 * COIN;" some time ago, so there could be much more pre-mined coins.
This change of source code takes effect only on getwork and validation of block. So, if you mine block #1 with this function in client, you'll get 2M of coins. If you change code to "200000000000000 * COIN" some time later, you'll still have 2M of coins. Also, if you change this value to less than 2M, block #1 will be detected as invalid, and as a result, you'll get a split of block chain.
January 27, 2012, 12:11:41 PM
Quote
Anyway could u plz post here data that prove premined qty of coins? And a way how this data could be obtained.
You can download source codehttps://www.rucoin.org/rucoin-0.401.tar.gz
and see this in GetBlockValue function:
Quote
int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees)
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
if (nHeight == 1)
nSubsidy = 2000000 * COIN;
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
if (nHeight == 1)
nSubsidy = 2000000 * COIN;
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
Btw, they could change the code from "20000000000000000 * COIN;" to "2000000 * COIN;" some time ago, so there could be much more pre-mined coins.
January 27, 2012, 10:06:36 AM
My pool is closed now. I have been discovered 2M of pre-mined coins in the second block. Rucoin it's a SCAM, and I don't want support It.
Well... Pre-mine doesn't mean SCAM...
Anyway could u plz post here data that prove premined qty of coins? And a way how this data could be obtained.
Thx in advance.
Quote
Anyway could u plz post here data that prove premined qty of coins? And a way how this data could be obtained.
You can download source codehttps://www.rucoin.org/rucoin-0.401.tar.gz
and see this in GetBlockValue function:
Quote
int64 static GetBlockValue(int nHeight, int64 nFees)
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
if (nHeight == 1)
nSubsidy = 2000000 * COIN;
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
{
int64 nSubsidy = 50 * COIN;
// Subsidy is cut in half every 4 years
nSubsidy >>= (nHeight / 210000);
if (nHeight == 1)
nSubsidy = 2000000 * COIN;
return nSubsidy + nFees;
}
January 27, 2012, 10:02:02 AM
My pool is closed now. I have been discovered 2M of pre-mined coins in the second block. Rucoin it's a SCAM, and I don't want support It.
at least open your site back up so i can withdraw my coins
January 25, 2012, 06:02:23 PM
My pool is closed now. I have been discovered 2M of pre-mined coins in the second block. Rucoin it's a SCAM, and I don't want support It.
at least open your site back up so i can withdraw my coins
Jump to: