Topic: Finding p2pool networks.py values for new altcoins - page 5. (Read 38034 times)

Hi Cartman

Im using this version currently. Im willing to try some older versions if you think this could be why we are hitting these issues

3.3-96-g7f43101-dirty

For those having problems I was curious as to what version of the p2pool source you were trying to use? Have seen that the latest version of p2pool (13.4) requires later versions of BTC and LTC wallets. Perhaps the ALT coin wallets you are using may not be compatible with 13.4. Try p2pool version 13.3 or earlier.

Hey

Also interested in this... skype: kh4n2k8
Maybe we can get some interest / support from rav3n or cartman in maintaing a GIT for as many cryptos as we can manage.

I can help with providing stable/high-speed hosting for the nodes... as well as tinkering with the source files.

I certainly would be interested in doing that. Timing is key though. I too have tried to get earthcoin going but there is an issue with the p2pool code and the wallet. I've been running into sporadic disconnects. The post above me details that, but I'm sure with the right people, this can be overcome.

I'm in CST time and cane be available during the day tues and thur or perhaps on a weekend or late weeknight.

Guys. Is anyone interested in opening a Skype Chat group to discuss P2Pool configurations.

I have setup several coins that are working perfectly now on P2Pool.

These include Dogecoin, Worldcoin, Feathercoin, Casinocoin

I have configured Grandcoin and Frankocoin but have a few issues getting these up and running. The process runs ok but all my stats are blank.

If anyone wants to trade coin settings or work on this together let me know. Lets work on expanding ALT coins available on P2Pool sites. It benefits us all.

Im also hoping to roll out Earthcoin soon.

If you want to discuss further PM me or hit me up on Skype. My Skype ID is SEOCrow

I've recently tried to port p2pool to some newer alt coins and have been hitting a brick wall. I'm pretty sure this going beyond basic network.py values but I wanted to get some opinions.

I've tried setting this up for grandcoin, lottocoin, luckycoin and earthcoin. The one I'm most interested in getting to work is earthcoin, so let's take that one for example. This is the error I receive when running it.


Now, what I noticed is in the pack.py file, the functions
is where the error is being thrown. The pos is always 1 character bigger then len(data) when the error is thrown. So setting the ignore_trailing=True eliminates the error, but when testing it against earthcoin, we hashed overnight and found a few blocks. However, none of them were actually committed to the blockchain and nothing was paid out. So I assume that is messing with the blocks submitted and they're not valid.

If you don't change that variable, the error that was mentioned is thrown for a while. Eventually it will connect to the wallet daemon, and you can actually hash in the pool, however the connection to the wallet will go unstable and the errors will start again. The connection to the wallet never really stabilizes.

Just for reference  here are my earthcoin network.py values.


If anyone that has better python skills than me, and a better knowledge of how p2pool works cares to help, I'd greatly appreciate it. Like I said, I don't think this is isolated to earthcoin as I've seen this behavior with several new alt coins. Also, I've posted a bug report on the official p2pool github in case anyone wants to contribute.

Cartman, thank you looks like I almost done with config settings
But now... I trying to run your version of p2pool, for craftcoin.
Craftcoin without pool for solo working good.

When I do

I getting error "twisted.web.error.Error: 401 Authorization Required"
 

And funny thing - with NameCoin error too:
Maybe someonehad same error  and  have an idea?

Thanks!
Found several things:
RPC_PORT in the bitcoinrpc.cpp - but updated wallets have only constants DEF_RPC_PORT etc there, real values can be found in the protocol.h file.
Also there values for testnet:
DEF_PORT
const int DEF_RPCPORT
const int DEF_TESTNET_PORT
const int DEF_TESTNET_RPCPORT

All testnet and other ports are correct now, but still same error "Check failed".
That strange, some coins working good with p2pool, some have that error.

FINALLY LOL!

Thanks so much, testing now...

To generate unique values for IDENTIFIER and PREFIX create a random string of 19 numbers and convert to Hex.

I use the windows Programmer Calculator to do the conversion (View menu).

Example:
5486237465184378845 = 4C2307E841C11FDD

I have always just slightly modified them from another coin already in network.py. Yes, it has to be unique within network.py or I think you'll get an error. So for example, if the litecoin IDENTIFIER is , then just take that and slightly modify a few numbers. Make it something like and see if that works (just changed the last digit). I'm pretty sure that will be fine, as it's what I've done, but if there is someone else who thinks I'm off, please speak up.


However, if you want other to be able to connect to you, it will need to be unique and posted online so others can follow. If you want to fork the original p2pool code or forkl Rav3n or Cartman's code in github and add your own entries, then report back if you're successful, then others will know and be able to obtain your values and run their own nodes for your coin. That's how most of the entries in network.py get shares, through github forks.

Thank you, very useful. Yes about P2P_PREFIX  I got it and found how to create it.

Ok, let's say I want to run p2pool node with others. But for some new coin, that still do not have much nodes, how to generate IDENTIFIER and PREFIX ?
If I writing random string, its not working, pool return me exception.

Can I take ready values from some other coin? And will it conflict with existing coins inside networks.py?
Let's say I have FST and want to add LOTOCoin. Should that values (IDENTIFIER ) to be unique for each coin listed in networks.py or unique values per coin doesn't required?

useful

The IDENTIFIER and PREFIX in the network.py are only used to identify your p2pool node with others of the same coin. Technically, if you want to run a p2pool node with others, these values must be the same across all nodes. If you don't want to run the p2pool with others, then you can create these yourself and keep them private so no nodes can connect with you.

However, if you're referring to the P2P_PREFIX in the bitcoin/networks.py, then yes, that is coin specific. I believe that is mentioned earlier in this thread on where to find it, so read up a little, but I know you'll be looking in the coins source in the main.cpp file. Lool for pchMessageStart[4] and you'll see the hex codes that you need to pull out there.

As far as the helper.py file, I don't think that needs to be modified anymore. At least I haven't been modifying it and have been able to successfully create some pools. I don't think the line that is referenced above exists anymore.

Same here but I have another error
I always have an error "Authorisation required" after running pool
I have feeling its because of incorrect IDENTIFIER and  PREFIX values.
How did you calculate them?

btw, did you found line where to add new coin name in bitcoin/helper.py (about what talking here at the top of topic ? Something like that:

So I've been trying to get a few alt coin pools up lately. I've been working on lottocoin, grandcoin, earthcoin and luckycoin. None of which have i seen very much success. I'm fairly confident that through this topic, I've been able to add the correct information in the networks.py files. I can post copies of those if needed. However, what I'm really having issues with is this message that is being logged in the output of p2pool each second.


This error is logged several times a second and is happening for each one of the new coins I've tried. However, the same p2pool code is running WDC, CSC and FTC pools successfully without that error.

Also, I'm able to successfully connect to the pool and hash in it, but it seems the connection to the wallet daemon is lost every few minutes and takes a minute or two to reconnect. My miner will show that it's having issues connecting to the stratum server and then eventually connect back up and start hashing again.

Does anyone know the cause of this error? Is it just something code related to these new coins? I'd like to continue making p2pools for these new coins, but it seems the hurdle of adapting the p2pool code for these might just be too big to overcome.

Hi guys!

Thanks for really helpful information.
But I still can't understand or I miss something:

- How to calculate IDENTIFIER & PREFIX value adding new coin in p2pool ?

Also inside file bitcoin/helper.py I do not see that line


Where is it? Or there already no needs to add new coin description?

Thanks!

Merry XMas and Happy New Year to all

There seems to be some confusion about the values for networks.py, so lets see if we can sort things out and provide a bit of clarification:

SHARE_PERIOD: How often should P2Pool generate a new share (rule of thumb: 1/5 - 1/10 of the block period)
CHAIN_LENGTH: How many shares P2Pool client keeps
REAL_CHAIN_LENGTH: The {N} value in PPLNS
Note:  REAL_CHAIN_LENGTH must always be <= CHAIN_LENGTH

SPREAD:  How long a 'share' is valid (ie. for how many block can be paid for this share)
TARGET_LOOKBEHIND: Is used for diff calculations.  (ie. how many previous shares to use in calculating difficulty) - lower values can be used to prevent a big miner from getting too many shares before diff rises
PERSIST: False (if you want to allow your server to run independently of any bootstrap nodes... but still allow syncing if they exist).  True will require other nodes on the network to run.
IDENTIFIER & PREFIX: P2Pool will only sync with other nodes who have Identifier and Prefix matching yours (and using same p2p port).. if any of the above values change, a new identifier & prefix need to be created in order to prevent problems.

Example:


CasinoCoin generates a new block every 30 seconds.  SHARE_PERIOD should be 1/5 to 1/10th of that.  In this case 5s is (1/6) share period.  Having a value above 1/5 risks more stale shares & larger inefficiency.
CHAIN_LENGTH & REAL_CHAIN_LENGTH are set up to allow for 3 Hour PPLNS.
TARGET_LOOKBEHIND is set to 60 (shares) giving a 300 second (5min) difficulty adjustment.
SPREAD is set to 60 blocks, so a share will be valid up to 60 blocks or REAL_CHAIN_LENGTH (3 hours), whichever is shorter.
P2P_PORT, IDENTIFIER & PREFIX must match the other nodes you wish to sync with... (all the above values must also match)

Hope this clears a few things up!!

if "randomly" superblocks would be possible (which retard introduced this? sheesh...), you could abuse this system to only create superblocks lol

Thanks man I wish you good lucky too!

I agree with you, non standard code in the coin code only makes things harder, I will keep trying till I get the pool up!! Thanks again!

i tryed to make just PoS+PoW p2pool modification from NVC/BTB source and i was not successfull - but i did not tryed yet the last advice from minerapia. (my test env. is down now and i do not have much time)
the p2pool code modifications for PoS are written in this thread but in case of any special stuff in coin you need to modify the p2pool code.
for NVC the dev. of the coin modified the coin to be able to run with p2pool and BTB is very similar coin to NVC

so you need basically very good python skills and good contact with the coin dev. in order to be able to understand the special features and python skill to make it work with p2pool.
and in case of "random" superblocks i do not see any way how to work with the 8times higher value for that coin - you need to ask the dev how you would find out that you are mining or have mined the superblock and in that case use different payout method for the miners and then again go on standard.

well maybe try first some normal PoS coin p2pool modification and then build on that knowledge - that will be my way after i will have more time... but still i will test the last advice from minerapia because i spent a lot of time on that and i am curious if it will work.

good luck man - i like the p2pool idea because i feel all that coins who are having p2pool are the most successfull coins. But only one dev. made coin and p2pool source modification at the beginning - no one else is doing it beucause they waste time on special features of the coin and then there is no power to make the p2pool working with it.