Half the "problem" is that some people simply don't care for Namecoins. So I want to avoid wasting them if possible. Username and password are the same exact field in HTTP auth.
[/quote]
Got it, thanks. So is it going to be easier to have someone use a miner that supports sending an extremely long HTTP auth field or exporting and importing keys if they really want namecoins?
Topic: [OLD] Eligius: ASIC, no registration, no fee CPPSRB BTC + 105% PPS NMC, 877 # - page 182. (Read 458255 times)
October 10, 2011, 06:44:37 PM
October 10, 2011, 06:38:47 PM
How about a BTC address.NMC address as user id. If a NMC address is not provided then more for you or split between those who do care for them.
Many miners can't send usernames that long. If you export your Bitcoin key and import it to Namecoin, that works reasonably. October 10, 2011, 06:32:14 PM
How about a BTC address.NMC address as user id. If a NMC address is not provided then more for you or split between those who do care for them.
Many miners can't send usernames that long. If you export your Bitcoin key and import it to Namecoin, that works reasonably. October 10, 2011, 06:16:22 PM
How about a BTC address.NMC address as user id. If a NMC address is not provided then more for you or split between those who do care for them.
Many miners can't send usernames that long. If you export your Bitcoin key and import it to Namecoin, that works reasonably. October 10, 2011, 05:48:59 PM
How about a BTC address.NMC address as user id. If a NMC address is not provided then more for you or split between those who do care for them.
October 10, 2011, 05:10:37 PM
Namecoin is, as previously said, going to the pool's wallet and will be distributed in a yet-to-be-decided way, and your input on specifically HOW to distribute it is welcome.
From the timestamp of merged mining start, all btc pool earned divided by personal btc earned to get % of nmc each user should get.
Basicly , any option is better than merged mining without getting nmc,s.
Maybe until I get a better system in place, I can do a daily or weekly distribution to interested users based on their contributions... need a way for users to express interest and prove they contributed tho.
October 10, 2011, 05:04:09 PM
Namecoin is, as previously said, going to the pool's wallet and will be distributed in a yet-to-be-decided way, and your input on specifically HOW to distribute it is welcome.
From the timestamp of merged mining start, all btc pool earned divided by personal btc earned to get % of nmc each user should get.
Basicly , any option is better than merged mining without getting nmc,s.
October 10, 2011, 04:50:08 PM
i guess i figured that i have to w8 to get auto paid to my wallet using btc, but what about nmc i earn, where can i view them and how do i payout them ?
You can see Bitcoin info at http://eligius.st/~artefact2/5/YourAddressGoesHereNamecoin is, as previously said, going to the pool's wallet and will be distributed in a yet-to-be-decided way, and your input on specifically HOW to distribute it is welcome.
October 10, 2011, 04:44:51 PM
Can someone correct me if im wrong, im kinda new to this.
i pointed my miners from gui miner to mining.eligius.st using 8337 port, username is my bitcoin wallet from my btc client and pass box is blank.
i guess i figured that i have to w8 to get auto paid to my wallet using btc, but what about nmc i earn, where can i view them and how do i payout them ?
i pointed my miners from gui miner to mining.eligius.st using 8337 port, username is my bitcoin wallet from my btc client and pass box is blank.
i guess i figured that i have to w8 to get auto paid to my wallet using btc, but what about nmc i earn, where can i view them and how do i payout them ?
October 10, 2011, 03:53:49 PM
Not the same thing.
I didn't tell it is the same, of course. My way is officially supported by namecoin developers :-P.
Quote
It still requires the messy bitcoind patches, and you need to integrate it with your pool software. :p
Looks like everybody prefers another solution. It's nice thing on bitcoin than everybody can do whatever he wants
. October 10, 2011, 03:41:40 PM
That doesn't support anything but proxy, and is in fact the exact code my merged-mine-manager is based on.
1. ask proxy for actual aux using getaux method
2. use this aux in getworkaux(aux) for asking directly bitcoind for new work (no mm call here)
3. filter out shares with lower difficulty than min(bitcoin difficulty, namecoin difficulty), send the rest to proxy. It still make almost no load to proxy
4. If your pool detect that namecoin or proxy crashed, use latest aux for all getwork requests, so you don't need proxy.
5. If you receive share during proxy outage, call getworkaux('submit',
6. Profit! (And without any custom code)
October 10, 2011, 03:38:42 PM
That doesn't support anything but proxy, and is in fact the exact code my merged-mine-manager is based on.
1. ask proxy for actual aux using getaux method
2. use this aux in getworkaux(aux) for asking directly bitcoind for new work (no proxy call here)
3. filter out shares with lower difficulty than min(bitcoin difficulty, namecoin difficulty), send the rest to proxy. It still make almost no load to proxy
4. If your pool detect that namecoin or proxy crashed, use latest aux for all getwork requests, so you don't need proxy.
5. If you receive share during proxy outage, call getworkaux('submit',
6. Profit! (And without any custom code)
October 10, 2011, 03:19:22 PM
Or maybe because nobody knows where this "merge-mine-proxy 0.2.2" is, if it's even publicly available? 
Yes, linked from dot-bit.org page about merged mining :-).
October 10, 2011, 03:00:53 PM
Or maybe because nobody knows where this "merge-mine-proxy 0.2.2" is, if it's even publicly available?
Yes, linked from dot-bit.org page about merged mining :-).
October 10, 2011, 02:55:39 PM
Why custom? Vince's implementation inserts a proxy between pushpool and bitcoind, adding yet another untested point of failure and bottleneck.
Since merge-mine-proxy 0.2.2 there's chance to use this proxy only for share submits and ocassional aux update by pool software, which cannot be bottleneck at all. However yet another custom implementation is giving some chance that those versions become incompatible
.Quote
In fact, people have already begun reporting issues with it.
Because they're using naive way of putting merge-mine-proxy between pool and bitcoind. It's not necessary at all.
Quote
Eligius's implementation puts all the merged-mining stuff BEHIND bitcoind, where it can be ignored if it malfunctions (while Bitcoin mining goes on as usual).
Which can be done also with vinced's proxy version without a problem, as I did. Pleae don't spread the FUD
. October 10, 2011, 02:34:57 PM
Why custom? Vince's implementation inserts a proxy between pushpool and bitcoind, adding yet another untested point of failure and bottleneck.
Since merge-mine-proxy 0.2.2 there's chance to use this proxy only for share submits and ocassional aux update by pool software, which cannot be bottleneck at all. However yet another custom implementation is giving some chance that those versions become incompatible
.Quote
In fact, people have already begun reporting issues with it.
Because they're using naive way of putting merge-mine-proxy between pool and bitcoind. It's not necessary at all.
Quote
Eligius's implementation puts all the merged-mining stuff BEHIND bitcoind, where it can be ignored if it malfunctions (while Bitcoin mining goes on as usual).
Which can be done also with vinced's proxy version without a problem, as I did. Pleae don't spread the FUD
. October 10, 2011, 02:32:32 PM
We're now testing a CUSTOM implementation of merged mining with namecoins.
What is merged mining? Basically it means the pool gets some Namecoins in addition to the Bitcoins we're already getting, at no cost to us. In return, the namecoin network gets more hashpower confirming their transactions/domains.
Why custom? Vince's implementation inserts a proxy between pushpool and bitcoind, adding yet another untested point of failure and bottleneck. In fact, people have already begun reporting issues with it. Eligius's implementation puts all the merged-mining stuff BEHIND bitcoind, where it can be ignored if it malfunctions (while Bitcoin mining goes on as usual). Unlike most merged mining pools out there, I have taken great efforts to ensure it does not affect the Bitcoin mining in any negative way.
Distribution of earned Namecoins is still to be decided. Suggestions welcome. Long-term plans is to have it work the same as the Bitcoin mining, but that requires a rewrite (which I'm actually started working on!).
What is merged mining? Basically it means the pool gets some Namecoins in addition to the Bitcoins we're already getting, at no cost to us. In return, the namecoin network gets more hashpower confirming their transactions/domains.
Why custom? Vince's implementation inserts a proxy between pushpool and bitcoind, adding yet another untested point of failure and bottleneck. In fact, people have already begun reporting issues with it. Eligius's implementation puts all the merged-mining stuff BEHIND bitcoind, where it can be ignored if it malfunctions (while Bitcoin mining goes on as usual). Unlike most merged mining pools out there, I have taken great efforts to ensure it does not affect the Bitcoin mining in any negative way.
Distribution of earned Namecoins is still to be decided. Suggestions welcome. Long-term plans is to have it work the same as the Bitcoin mining, but that requires a rewrite (which I'm actually started working on!).
if you dont want to add registrations maybe this:
you could simple add a text field where the user could enter his nmc address (and forbid any changes after it has been entered).
of course this has the drawback that some users may be forced to change their btc mining address (if someone else was faster)
if a user has not entered a nmc address you could take it as a donation.
Also, on the rewrite... current plans are to support TWO reward systems:
- PPLNS or (new idea) Proportional × 8
- ESMPPS or CPPSRB
+1
October 10, 2011, 02:13:55 PM
We're now testing a CUSTOM implementation of merged mining with namecoins.
What is merged mining? Basically it means the pool gets some Namecoins in addition to the Bitcoins we're already getting, at no cost to us. In return, the namecoin network gets more hashpower confirming their transactions/domains.
Why custom? Vince's implementation inserts a proxy between pushpool and bitcoind, adding yet another untested point of failure and bottleneck. In fact, people have already begun reporting issues with it. Eligius's implementation puts all the merged-mining stuff BEHIND bitcoind, where it can be ignored if it malfunctions (while Bitcoin mining goes on as usual). Unlike most merged mining pools out there, I have taken great efforts to ensure it does not affect the Bitcoin mining in any negative way.
Distribution of earned Namecoins is still to be decided. Suggestions welcome. Long-term plans is to have it work the same as the Bitcoin mining, but that requires a rewrite (which I'm actually started working on!).
Also, on the rewrite... current plans are to support TWO reward systems:
What is merged mining? Basically it means the pool gets some Namecoins in addition to the Bitcoins we're already getting, at no cost to us. In return, the namecoin network gets more hashpower confirming their transactions/domains.
Why custom? Vince's implementation inserts a proxy between pushpool and bitcoind, adding yet another untested point of failure and bottleneck. In fact, people have already begun reporting issues with it. Eligius's implementation puts all the merged-mining stuff BEHIND bitcoind, where it can be ignored if it malfunctions (while Bitcoin mining goes on as usual). Unlike most merged mining pools out there, I have taken great efforts to ensure it does not affect the Bitcoin mining in any negative way.
Distribution of earned Namecoins is still to be decided. Suggestions welcome. Long-term plans is to have it work the same as the Bitcoin mining, but that requires a rewrite (which I'm actually started working on!).
Also, on the rewrite... current plans are to support TWO reward systems:
- PPLNS or (new idea) Proportional × 8
- ESMPPS or CPPSRB
October 07, 2011, 11:34:55 AM
PSJ crashed (out of memory... with 16 GB free).
Eligius will offer merged mining as soon as it is practically possible, but there are some real practical issues to doing so.
Eligius will offer merged mining as soon as it is practically possible, but there are some real practical issues to doing so.
It sounds like you could run PSJ with large JVM heap size, with "-Xmx" option.
October 07, 2011, 10:37:14 AM
PSJ crashed (out of memory... with 16 GB free).
Eligius will offer merged mining as soon as it is practically possible, but there are some real practical issues to doing so.
Eligius will offer merged mining as soon as it is practically possible, but there are some real practical issues to doing so.
Jump to: