block.version=1 blocks will all be orphaned soon

jl2012

legendary

Activity: 1792

Merit: 1111

Quote from: caveden on March 27, 2013, 03:37:29 AM

I think I was sleeping while all this happened.

Could somebody please explain me one thing.... The whole point of this "version 2 blocks" was just to include the height in the coinbase? I mean... can't the height just be calculated? Couldn't local databases add the height on their data, in an extra field of some kind? Need it be on the protocol?

I fail to see why going through all this hassle just to add the block height to coinbase...

It's to avoid identical coinbase transactions: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0034

caveden

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1004

I think I was sleeping while all this happened.

Could somebody please explain me one thing.... The whole point of this "version 2 blocks" was just to include the height in the coinbase? I mean... can't the height just be calculated? Couldn't local databases add the height on their data, in an extra field of some kind? Need it be on the protocol?

I fail to see why going through all this hassle just to add the block height to coinbase...

spunit262

newbie

Activity: 18

Merit: 0

Quote from: Nancarrow on March 26, 2013, 06:22:10 PM

Quote from: evilpete on March 25, 2013, 05:49:58 AM

A very large portion of v2 hashing is offline (btcguild - roughly 30-40%; for nearly 3 hours now) and a couple of v1 miners got lucky in a row.

The rest of the v2 network overtook them and the network reorganized.

Excuse the tinfoil hat, but, notwithstanding Eleuthria's correction of your percentages, did we just see an attempt to sabotage Bitcoin? I know Eleuthria has had the occasional DDOS before, but this particular one at this particular time? I sure hope the dev team and a few pool operators are busy combing through transaction logs with forensic attention to detail...

Given all the hubbub about his pool getting close to 51%, it could have been an extremely miss guided attempt to save Bitcoin.

Nancarrow

hero member

Activity: 492

Merit: 503

Quote from: evilpete on March 25, 2013, 05:49:58 AM

A very large portion of v2 hashing is offline (btcguild - roughly 30-40%; for nearly 3 hours now) and a couple of v1 miners got lucky in a row.

The rest of the v2 network overtook them and the network reorganized.

Excuse the tinfoil hat, but, notwithstanding Eleuthria's correction of your percentages, did we just see an attempt to sabotage Bitcoin? I know Eleuthria has had the occasional DDOS before, but this particular one at this particular time? I sure hope the dev team and a few pool operators are busy combing through transaction logs with forensic attention to detail...

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

Quote from: evilpete on March 25, 2013, 05:49:58 AM

A very large portion of v2 hashing is offline (btcguild - roughly 30-40%; for nearly 3 hours now) and a couple of v1 miners got lucky in a row.

The rest of the v2 network overtook them and the network reorganized.

Only about 3 TH/s of BTC Guild was offline. The DDoS was only affecting getwork and a few people using the very first versions of Stratum which couldn't connect properly without being redirected from getwork.

jgarzik

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1100

Quote from: jl2012 on March 25, 2013, 03:48:16 AM

What happens to the few coinbase transactions with duplicate transaction id? Are the coins irrecoverably lost?

Yes. The newer coinbase stomps the older coinbase, making the older coinbase unspendable.

evilpete

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

A very large portion of v2 hashing is offline (btcguild - roughly 30-40%; for nearly 3 hours now) and a couple of v1 miners got lucky in a row.

The rest of the v2 network overtook them and the network reorganized.

jl2012

legendary

Activity: 1792

Merit: 1111

Quote from: jl2012 on March 25, 2013, 04:20:47 AM

Quote from: solex on March 25, 2013, 03:59:12 AM

http://blockchain.info/block-index/368023/0000000000000124fefda3e554e72cd08aad4b9caaa6e4c3221ae93238180c0c

latest block 227938 shown as v1, so I would expect this to be orphaned, although blockchain has it shown as main chain still...

edit: blockexplorer shows a different block, v2
http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000001f205a713a6e23dd2f8c3eed42ffbd765bdfe54d353757ee18a

The latest 2 blocks (227938, 227939) are both version 1. What's going on??? A fork??

Something strange happened..... I'm running 0.8.1 and only have 00000000000001f205a713a6e23dd2f8c3eed42ffbd765bdfe54d353757ee18a (227938, v2)

However, blockchain.info has no record of 00000000000001f205a713a6e23dd2f8c3eed42ffbd765bdfe54d353757ee18a, and have 0000000000000124fefda3e554e72cd08aad4b9caaa6e4c3221ae93238180c0c (227938, v1) and 000000000000025fcc58a882db6c3b47ea90935b522c08d279e415b9529de41d (227939, v1) instead

jl2012

legendary

Activity: 1792

Merit: 1111

Quote from: solex on March 25, 2013, 03:59:12 AM

http://blockchain.info/block-index/368023/0000000000000124fefda3e554e72cd08aad4b9caaa6e4c3221ae93238180c0c

latest block 227938 shown as v1, so I would expect this to be orphaned, although blockchain has it shown as main chain still...

edit: blockexplorer shows a different block, v2
http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000001f205a713a6e23dd2f8c3eed42ffbd765bdfe54d353757ee18a

The latest 2 blocks (227938, 227939) are both version 1. What's going on??? A fork??

solex

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1006

100 satoshis -> ISO code

http://blockchain.info/block-index/368023/0000000000000124fefda3e554e72cd08aad4b9caaa6e4c3221ae93238180c0c

latest block 227938 shown as v1, so I would expect this to be orphaned, although blockchain has it shown as main chain still...

edit: blockexplorer shows a different block, v2
http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000001f205a713a6e23dd2f8c3eed42ffbd765bdfe54d353757ee18a

jl2012

legendary

Activity: 1792

Merit: 1111

What happens to the few coinbase transactions with duplicate transaction id? Are the coins irrecoverably lost?

jgarzik

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1100

This event is now past.

keystroke

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1014

advocate of a cryptographic attack on the globe

Quote from: solex on March 24, 2013, 03:08:08 PM

The reason all this is important is not just that some miners will be forced to upgrade or give up Bitcoin when the 95% is reached. What's important is that this is a proof of concept for implementation of changes in the "wish list" and "hard fork" baskets.

The block version mechanism for a majority consensus on accepting such changes is essential if Bitcoin is to succeed by capturing a significant chunk of the fiat and payments market share. News from the EU this week shows the dark alternative of trusting fiat systems forever.

Yes, exactly. +1
Just got to 94%.

Edit:
11 blocks to go. Block 227930 should be it.

solex

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1006

100 satoshis -> ISO code

The reason all this is important is not just that some miners will be forced to upgrade or give up Bitcoin when the 95% is reached. What's important is that this is a proof of concept for implementation of changes in the "wish list" and "hard fork" baskets.

The block version mechanism for a majority consensus on accepting such changes is essential if Bitcoin is to succeed by capturing a significant chunk of the fiat and payments market share. News from the EU this week shows the dark alternative of trusting fiat systems forever.

evilpete

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

Who? http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/top.php implies that coinlabs and btc warp haven't updated. But you don't have to be a pool to mine, it could be somebody with a gpu that's solo mining and getting lucky, a group of friends, somebody keeping their company's PC's busy overnight.. who knows?

FWIW, in age order:
50th: 226951
49th: 226954
48th: 226960
47th: 226971
46th: 226974

Assuming no more v1's, then the "last 1000" will have 50 x v1's and hence 95% at 227951.

One more v1 block pushes it to 227954. Two more -> 227960. Then 971, and 974.

At the current 855, that's 96 to go, best case.

keystroke

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1014

advocate of a cryptographic attack on the globe

Quote from: evilpete on March 24, 2013, 01:13:59 PM

A fresh v1 turned up at 227835, and that caused the finish line to jump forward.

The 50th oldest v1 is currently at 226951, so the cutover now should be 227951. As of writing, the block number is 227851 so that's 100 to go.

Who might these unknowns be who haven't upgraded? Solo miners? Botnets still possible?

evilpete

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

A fresh v1 turned up at 227835, and that caused the finish line to jump forward.

The 50th oldest v1 is currently at 226951, so the cutover now should be 227951. As of writing, the block number is 227851 so that's 100 to go.

keystroke

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1014

advocate of a cryptographic attack on the globe

Quote from: evilpete on March 24, 2013, 02:01:20 AM

FYI, as of 227743, counting v1 blocks backwards puts the 50th version=1 block at about 226930.

That means, at 227930 (assuming no more v=1 blocks), there will be 950 of the last 1000 and a 95% supermajority.

That's roughly 185 blocks from now. 24-30 hours. It should be all over in time for breakfast in the US on Monday morning.

Of course, there's probably going to be 5-10 more v1 blocks so I'm guestimating 227940.

Edit: 24-30 hours is wishful thinking given the spike in hash rate. Probably < 24 hours now.

Thanks for doing this analysis!

Just before 1pm EST: We are currently at 62 out of the latest 1000 blocks on version 1 (6.20%) and 938 out of the latest 1000 blocks on version 2 (93.80%)

evilpete

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

FYI, as of 227743, counting v1 blocks backwards puts the 50th version=1 block at about 226930.

That means, at 227930 (assuming no more v=1 blocks), there will be 950 of the last 1000 and a 95% supermajority.

That's roughly 185 blocks from now. 24-30 hours. It should be all over in time for breakfast in the US on Monday morning.

Of course, there's probably going to be 5-10 more v1 blocks so I'm guestimating 227940.

Edit: 24-30 hours is wishful thinking given the spike in hash rate. Probably < 24 hours now.

Graet

vip

Activity: 980

Merit: 1001

Quote from: antimattercrusader on March 23, 2013, 11:57:32 PM

Quote from: DBG on March 18, 2013, 06:10:40 PM

So long and thanks for all the bitcoin Deepbit?

I am missing something, is deepbit not compatible with the updates?

Please fill me in!

wishful thinking
http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/top.php
Deepbit updated to v2
coinlabs and btcwarp are the only vulnerable pools now

keystroke

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1014

advocate of a cryptographic attack on the globe

Quote from: antimattercrusader on March 23, 2013, 11:57:32 PM

Quote from: DBG on March 18, 2013, 06:10:40 PM

So long and thanks for all the bitcoin Deepbit?

I am missing something, is deepbit not compatible with the updates?

Please fill me in!

It is now

When that post was made it wasn't compatible.

antimattercrusader

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

Quote from: DBG on March 18, 2013, 06:10:40 PM

So long and thanks for all the bitcoin Deepbit?

I am missing something, is deepbit not compatible with the updates?

Please fill me in!

Graet

vip

Activity: 980

Merit: 1001

Ozcoin has shutdown ecoinpool and setup stratum proxy for getwork miners to continue and create v2 blocks

keystroke

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1014

advocate of a cryptographic attack on the globe

About to hit 91%. I think we will hit the v2 within the week.

Rothgar

sr. member

Activity: 374

Merit: 250

Tune in to Neocash Radio

Quote from: solex on March 23, 2013, 04:02:17 PM

Coinlabs and BTC Warp are the only pools with no recent V2 block.
Hopefully they are looking at v0.8.1 now...

They will have to if they want to mine valid blocks. It seems now it's just a matter of time before that 95% threshold is met. The variance should make the probability of hitting it in the next 5000 or so blocks very high.

solex

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1006

100 satoshis -> ISO code

Coinlabs and BTC Warp are the only pools with no recent V2 block.
Hopefully they are looking at v0.8.1 now...

kinlo

sr. member

Activity: 263

Merit: 250

Pool operator of Triplemining.com

Quote from: evilpete on March 23, 2013, 12:07:17 AM

There was a new version-1 from ozcoin a short while ago at block 227377
https://blockchain.info/block-index/365073/00000000000002accb0c886f0e511c56534b71fabac24e38703a476ff4972727

All the other big pools seem to be producing v2 now.

Ozcoin is going to shutdown their getwork servers today. This means that *after* today they won't produce v1's anymore, but today they still might...

evilpete

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

There was a new version-1 from ozcoin a short while ago at block 227377
https://blockchain.info/block-index/365073/00000000000002accb0c886f0e511c56534b71fabac24e38703a476ff4972727

All the other big pools seem to be producing v2 now.

keystroke

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1014

advocate of a cryptographic attack on the globe

Up to 89% now. Not long to go.

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

BTC Guild confirmed at making v2 blocks on getwork successfully. All servers should be updated now, but a little nervous that I may have missed one or not restarted one. Watching closely, but as of right now I think all of them are now on v2.

slush

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1097

Two days ago I fixed my getwork backend to produce v2 blocks.

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

BTC Guild has potentially hotfixed v2 support into getwork servers. It's running on the primary getwork server now after successful testnet blocks. If it does work, we should see supermajority on V2 very soon now that Deepbit has also started moving to v2 and ozcoin is disabling getwork entirely.

kinlo

sr. member

Activity: 263

Merit: 250

Pool operator of Triplemining.com

Quote from: solex on March 20, 2013, 11:55:13 PM

I do like your site kinlo.

This has puzzled me for a while though, the block counts don't usually add to 1000, and hence the percentages don't add to 100. For example now:
"only the last 1000 blocks are used. We are currently at 162 out of the latest 1000 blocks on version 1 (16.20%) and 822 out of the latest 1000 blocks on version 2 (82.20%)"

I assume that it is because the balance are orphan blocks?

Some blocks are not identified as v1 or v2, so they are not counted at all Not that many tough, I'll investigate why.

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

Quote from: keystroke on March 21, 2013, 01:51:07 AM

Deepbit has switched over tonight but as eleuthria points out we will still be short of the 95% supermajority.

Well this is unexpected. Looks like either I'll have to kill getwork this weekend with Ozcoin, or find a way to get PoolServerJ to work with v2 at that time. I do not want to be the one holding back this change.

keystroke

hero member

Activity: 900

Merit: 1014

advocate of a cryptographic attack on the globe

Deepbit has switched over tonight but as eleuthria points out we will still be short of the 95% supermajority.

solex

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1006

100 satoshis -> ISO code

Quote from: kinlo on March 20, 2013, 07:59:54 AM

Blockorigin has been fixed too. So we're now still at 16.90% v1 blocks...

I do like your site kinlo.

This has puzzled me for a while though, the block counts don't usually add to 1000, and hence the percentages don't add to 100. For example now:
"only the last 1000 blocks are used. We are currently at 162 out of the latest 1000 blocks on version 1 (16.20%) and 822 out of the latest 1000 blocks on version 2 (82.20%)"

I assume that it is because the balance are orphan blocks?

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

Quote from: mot7 on March 20, 2013, 11:07:19 AM

Has anything interesting happend on TestNet as a result of this change?

I discovered the change on TestNet when first designing my custom pool code (before Stratum was announced). At that time, Testnet had started requiring V2 blocks, and all my V1 blocks were rejected. So it behaved as expected as far as I could tell.

mot7

newbie

Activity: 19

Merit: 0

Has anything interesting happend on TestNet as a result of this change?

kinlo

sr. member

Activity: 263

Merit: 250

Pool operator of Triplemining.com

Blockorigin has been fixed too. So we're now still at 16.90% v1 blocks...

Gavin Andresen

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 2301

Chief Scientist

There are three stages to the rollout:

1. Before 75% are producing block.version=2 blocks: no special checking
2. Between 75 and 95% : block.version=2 blocks MUST have height in coinbase. We are here.
3. 95% or more: all blocks MUST be block.version=2 and MUST have height in coinbase. Should happen soon.

Shell script to count block versions:

Code:

gavin$ for i in {225925..226925}; do ./bitcoind getblock $(./bitcoind getblockhash $i); done | grep version | sort | uniq -c
 173     "version" : 1,
 828     "version" : 2,

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

Quote from: kinlo on March 20, 2013, 07:17:54 AM

Scratch that, site is still building and out of sync... I'll update when I know for sure

It looks like we aren't - I ran a quick shell script on bitcoind. But due to a merge mining issue my coinbase has an invalid height and the check for that gets activated at 75% which we've hit. Lost three blocks, argh!

kinlo

sr. member

Activity: 263

Merit: 250

Pool operator of Triplemining.com

~~According to my site it's now down to 80 blocks on v1, 50 and we're there...~~

Scratch that, site is still building and out of sync... I'll update when I know for sure

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

Quote from: kinlo on March 20, 2013, 07:05:04 AM

Iek, fixing that problem, thanks for noticing

No worries. I'd been using it to track the supermajority and working today on getting my merge mining server compatible with version 2 blocks. Then I noticed the error in my logs and which makes me think we've hit it and I've run out of time.

kinlo

sr. member

Activity: 263

Merit: 250

Pool operator of Triplemining.com

Quote from: doublec on March 20, 2013, 07:00:32 AM

Note their current block number showing in their list. It's over 1,000 blocks out of date.

Iek, fixing that problem, thanks for noticing

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

Quote from: kinlo on March 20, 2013, 06:59:13 AM

FYI: The blockorigin site keeps track of the last 1000 blocks on http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/top.php

In the text on the bottom you will see the counts in blocks on v1. 95% is required so if the number of blocks on v1 drop below 50 over the last 1000 blocks, all blocks v1 will be rejected!

Note their current block number showing in their list. It's over 1,000 blocks out of date.

kinlo

sr. member

Activity: 263

Merit: 250

Pool operator of Triplemining.com

FYI: The blockorigin site keeps track of the last 1000 blocks on http://blockorigin.pfoe.be/top.php

In the text on the bottom you will see the counts in blocks on v1. 95% is required so if the number of blocks on v1 drop below 50 over the last 1000 blocks, all blocks v1 will be rejected!

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

Have we hit this already? I'm seeing in the logs of a v1 node:

Code:

ERROR: AcceptBlock() : block height mismatch in coinbase

doublec

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1005

I just noticed that my merge mining getwork server was producing version 2 blocks without having a block height in the coinbase in certain circumstances. If you're a miner using a merge mining patch you might want to check that your coinbase is correct otherwise when the supermajority happens your blocks will be orphaned if the coinbase is wrong.

Graet

vip

Activity: 980

Merit: 1001

well with the forking blockchain and patches needed to keep ecoinpool running etc, I'm about ready to turn getwork servers off
with the threshold for V2 blocks getting much closer it wont be long until it breaks anyway

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

Quote from: wknight on March 19, 2013, 02:17:56 PM

I think it just happened to Ozcoin.

http://blockchain.info/block-index/362524/00000000000001b4ee26f0189e4e3d139a3b8c5c8179109f270819eac7284aab
http://blockchain.info/block-index/363019/00000000000001d68223b78f7c012dcdce458cb3b46f2b325bd7bc6d067c396b

That looks like your standard orphan. The EclipseMC block was seen 15 seconds before the OzCoin block. The time stamps just made it look the opposite due to Eclipse's timestamp being in the future, and Ozcoin's being in the past.

wknight

legendary

Activity: 889

Merit: 1000

Bitcoin calls me an Orphan

I think it just happened to Ozcoin.

http://blockchain.info/block-index/362524/00000000000001b4ee26f0189e4e3d139a3b8c5c8179109f270819eac7284aab
http://blockchain.info/block-index/363019/00000000000001d68223b78f7c012dcdce458cb3b46f2b325bd7bc6d067c396b

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

Quote from: DBG on March 19, 2013, 12:29:15 AM

I know Graet (ozcoin) doesn't quite want to take down the getwork/merged mining server yet (and strand those users by our hand), but take Deepbit out of the equation completely, and if the top 4 pools were to all make a clean break it would happen. However I was hoping for a rolling plan like slush proposed back in February, and I rather users update their software compared to just getting shut out. I know it will happen in time so patience is a virtue here Cry

.

Do note that this isn't a hard-fork. It just means if you continue trying to mine v1 blocks, they will not be accepted by the rest of the network. It's highly unlikely this would ever go beyond a single orphaned block, given the amount of hash power that is mining v2 blocks, and the amount of nodes that will refuse to forward your block.

This has been a "rolling plan". It's been in place for 8 months, and only takes place when a supermajority of 95% is on v2.

DBG

member

Activity: 119

Merit: 100

Digital Illustrator + Software/Hardware Developer

I know Graet (ozcoin) doesn't quite want to take down the getwork/merged mining server yet (and strand those users by our hand), but take Deepbit out of the equation completely, and if the top 4 pools were to all make a clean break it would happen. However I was hoping for a rolling plan like slush proposed back in February, and I rather users update their software compared to just getting shut out. I know it will happen in time so patience is a virtue here Cry

.

eleuthria

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1007

Quote from: grue on March 18, 2013, 06:17:25 PM

Quote from: DBG on March 18, 2013, 06:10:40 PM

So long and thanks for all the bitcoin Deepbit?

the only thing holding back this patch is deepbit

Not quite, we'd still be just shy if Deepbit's blocks were all v2. If BTC Guild getwork could support v2 right now we would just about be there. Working on that tomorrow to see if there's any way I can add v2 blocks to the coinbasing of PoolServerJ.

grue

legendary

Activity: 2058

Merit: 1452

Quote from: DBG on March 18, 2013, 06:10:40 PM

So long and thanks for all the bitcoin Deepbit?

the only thing holding back this patch is deepbit

DBG

member

Activity: 119

Merit: 100

Digital Illustrator + Software/Hardware Developer

So long and thanks for all the bitcoin Deepbit?

Gavin Andresen

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 2301

Chief Scientist

Last July, BIP 34 was accepted. It specifies a "soft fork":

Quote

If 950 of the last 1,000 blocks are version 2 or greater, reject all version 1 blocks

We are getting close to that threshold: 821 out of the latest 1000 blocks were version 2.

If you are mining in a pool: there is a list of pools and what versions they are producing here. If your pool is producting version=1 blocks, you should urge your pool operator to upgrade or patch.

If you are mining with p2pool or solo and using a very old version of bitcoind: you should upgrade, or you risk your blocks getting orphaned.

Topic: block.version=1 blocks will all be orphaned soon (Read 7276 times)