What if we have a massive (like many orders of magnitude) drop in network harsh rate? Might such a function be useful to salvage the (non-functioning) network? Same for IRC bootstrapping. How do we pick ourselves up off the ground in case of the equivalent of a great depression in network hash rate (or some jerk spending $100M just to drive the difficulty up and then turning his hardware off?).
-----Original Message----- From: bitcoin-development-boun...@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:bitcoin-development-boun...@lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of bitcoin-development-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 3:16 PM To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Bitcoin-development Digest, Vol 27, Issue 28 Send Bitcoin-development mailing list submissions to bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to bitcoin-development-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net You can reach the person managing the list at bitcoin-development-ow...@lists.sourceforge.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Bitcoin-development digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind (Jeff Garzik) 2. Re: Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind (Frank F) 3. Re: Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind (Luke-Jr) 4. Re: Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind (Pieter Wuille) 5. Re: Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind (Matt Corallo) 6. Re: Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind (Frank F) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 12:27:01 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik <jgar...@bitpay.com> Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Message-ID: <CAJHLa0MnnWw=qiYC0nJcY=bdtdcajgtraj+kazog7_bhw-h...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Pull request https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2905 proposes to remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork On mainnet, almost everybody uses a pool (and therefore, not "getwork" directly to bitcoind). Those few who solo mine use a pool server to talk to bitcoind via "getblocktemplate" or other means. Tests show that attempts to solo mine on mainnet via "getwork" lead to delays and problems. On testnet, getwork has a better chance of continuing to work. Nevertheless, the same tools (open source pool servers or p2pool) are available for testnet, obviating the continued need to support getwork. However, at one time, getwork to bitcoind was widely used. I wanted to poke the audience, to gauge response to removing "getwork." If a driving use case remains of which we're unaware, speak up, please. We don't want to break anybody needlessly. -- Jeff Garzik Senior Software Engineer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 15:09:41 -0500 From: Frank F <frank...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Message-ID: <calxyhsxocql8dnxeayibfbr7-ju6ke19gjj1ftobouldua1...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I strongly object to removing the only mechanism that allows anyone to say that bitcoin is p2p, in the truest sense of the word. Moves like this that favor only the pool operators and private mining interests are signs that bitcoin is headed towards a monopoly/cartel model, and that would be a tragic outcome for something that holds a great promise. Nobody knows what mining will look like in the future, and denying the individual novice the ability to mine at a small scale, even if we may think it is inefficient now, is not a good path to start down. If there are technical problems with getwork, maybe they should be addressed and fixed instead of outright abandoned. On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgar...@bitpay.com> wrote: > Pull request https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2905 proposes to > remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork > > On mainnet, almost everybody uses a pool (and therefore, not "getwork" > directly to bitcoind). Those few who solo mine use a pool server to > talk to bitcoind via "getblocktemplate" or other means. Tests show > that attempts to solo mine on mainnet via "getwork" lead to delays and > problems. > > On testnet, getwork has a better chance of continuing to work. > Nevertheless, the same tools (open source pool servers or p2pool) are > available for testnet, obviating the continued need to support > getwork. > > However, at one time, getwork to bitcoind was widely used. I wanted > to poke the audience, to gauge response to removing "getwork." If a > driving use case remains of which we're unaware, speak up, please. We > don't want to break anybody needlessly. > > -- > Jeff Garzik > Senior Software Engineer and open source evangelist > BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Introducing Performance Central, a new site from SourceForge and > AppDynamics. Performance Central is your source for news, insights, > analysis and resources for efficient Application Performance Management. > Visit us today! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897511&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > -- *MONEY IS OVER!* IF YOU WANT IT<http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/> ===================================================== The causes of my servitude can be traced to the tyranny of money. -Serj Tankian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:13:00 +0000 From: "Luke-Jr" <l...@dashjr.org> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <201308192013.02806.l...@dashjr.org> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" On Monday, August 19, 2013 8:09:41 PM Frank F wrote: > I strongly object to removing the only mechanism that allows anyone to say > that bitcoin is p2p, in the truest sense of the word. Moves like this that > favor only the pool operators and private mining interests are signs that > bitcoin is headed towards a monopoly/cartel model, and that would be a > tragic outcome for something that holds a great promise. Nobody knows what > mining will look like in the future, and denying the individual novice the > ability to mine at a small scale, even if we may think it is inefficient > now, is not a good path to start down. > > If there are technical problems with getwork, maybe they should be > addressed and fixed instead of outright abandoned. You missed getblocktemplate. It does everything getwork did and more. Individual solo miners aren't being locked out at all. This is just removal of a protocol that has been obsolete for well over a year now. Luke ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 22:14:36 +0200 From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wui...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind To: Frank F <frank...@gmail.com> Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Message-ID: <capg+sbjmdzfhpzrvhwmx6oqss0yjaxvjtnyrwf6vcdnwthq...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Frank F <frank...@gmail.com> wrote: > I strongly object to removing the only mechanism that allows anyone to say > that bitcoin is p2p, in the truest sense of the word. Moves like this that > favor only the pool operators and private mining interests are signs that > bitcoin is headed towards a monopoly/cartel model, and that would be a > tragic outcome for something that holds a great promise. Nobody knows what > mining will look like in the future, and denying the individual novice the > ability to mine at a small scale, even if we may think it is inefficient > now, is not a good path to start down. > > If there are technical problems with getwork, maybe they should be addressed > and fixed instead of outright abandoned. They were addressed and fixed in a successor API, getblocktemplate. It's even more decentralization-friendly, as it allows the caller to see what transactions the daemon is trying to put into a block, and even modify it. The suggestion here is not to remove functionality - only to remove an obsolete API for doing so. -- Pieter ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 16:15:08 -0400 From: Matt Corallo <bitcoin-l...@bluematt.me> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind To: Jeff Garzik <jgar...@bitpay.com> Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Message-ID: <1376943308.27037.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" ACK, I see no reason to leave broken things in that a) arent necessary and b) no one has the developer resources to fix. Matt On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 12:27 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Pull request https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2905 proposes to > remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork > > On mainnet, almost everybody uses a pool (and therefore, not "getwork" > directly to bitcoind). Those few who solo mine use a pool server to > talk to bitcoind via "getblocktemplate" or other means. Tests show > that attempts to solo mine on mainnet via "getwork" lead to delays and > problems. > > On testnet, getwork has a better chance of continuing to work. > Nevertheless, the same tools (open source pool servers or p2pool) are > available for testnet, obviating the continued need to support > getwork. > > However, at one time, getwork to bitcoind was widely used. I wanted > to poke the audience, to gauge response to removing "getwork." If a > driving use case remains of which we're unaware, speak up, please. We > don't want to break anybody needlessly. > ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 15:16:17 -0500 From: Frank F <frank...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: remove "getwork" RPC from bitcoind Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Message-ID: <CALxyHsV=lwy+tzzg-xbq6hnhxfeezjfhw++aj7ovbvgejww...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Thank you for setting me straight. Please forgive my ignorance. On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wui...@gmail.com>wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Frank F <frank...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I strongly object to removing the only mechanism that allows anyone to > say > > that bitcoin is p2p, in the truest sense of the word. Moves like this > that > > favor only the pool operators and private mining interests are signs that > > bitcoin is headed towards a monopoly/cartel model, and that would be a > > tragic outcome for something that holds a great promise. Nobody knows > what > > mining will look like in the future, and denying the individual novice > the > > ability to mine at a small scale, even if we may think it is inefficient > > now, is not a good path to start down. > > > > If there are technical problems with getwork, maybe they should be > addressed > > and fixed instead of outright abandoned. > > They were addressed and fixed in a successor API, getblocktemplate. > It's even more decentralization-friendly, as it allows the caller to > see what transactions the daemon is trying to put into a block, and > even modify it. > > The suggestion here is not to remove functionality - only to remove an > obsolete API for doing so. > > -- > Pieter > -- *MONEY IS OVER!* IF YOU WANT IT<http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/> ===================================================== The causes of my servitude can be traced to the tyranny of money. -Serj Tankian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... ------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Introducing Performance Central, a new site from SourceForge and AppDynamics. Performance Central is your source for news, insights, analysis and resources for efficient Application Performance Management. Visit us today! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897511&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development End of Bitcoin-development Digest, Vol 27, Issue 28 *************************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Introducing Performance Central, a new site from SourceForge and AppDynamics. Performance Central is your source for news, insights, analysis and resources for efficient Application Performance Management. Visit us today! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897511&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
