• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

v0.10.9.x Help test RC2 forking issues

Status
Not open for further replies.
NO WAY!! Hadn't noticed. Version 13 on Friday 13th... ok, nothing more to do except wait and see. I'll report back when payed, or "complain" again tomorrow.
 
yidakee said:
Mr.President, I notice that http://tdrk.poolhash.org/blocks/masterlist/moqpGCABQQefuujQ9nsAMJVEiwAXyAMw6o.txt is about -963 blocks behind block explorer. Any reason for such a bit difference?
Click to expand...


I ran scripts at 18736. and current block is 18779.
I can't understand the meaning of '-963 blocks

blockno.txt:ip:port status address lastseen/timestatmp lastseen(sec) activeseconds.
18050.txt:54.255.159.230:19999 1 moqpGCABQQefuujQ9nsAMJVEiwAXyAMw6o 1402544867698757 1268 205411
 
I just refreshed, last entry is

18736.txt:54.255.159.230:19999 1 moqpGCABQQefuujQ9nsAMJVEiwAXyAMw6o 1402652895093972 1173 313438
Click to expand...

Block 18736. Explorer is at 18796.

18796 - 18736 = -60 now.. must have picked up pace since.
 
Hey guys - wanted to shoot a quick update regarding that issue I had a few pages back (inbound port issues). Ended up being a st00pid elastic IP issue with Amazon, once I realized that the Elastic IP hadn't been assigned to my EC2 instance I reverted to the real IP address everything started up as expected.

I did notice a slightly strange quirk - deciding to play around with things a bit, I decided to try shutting down my Masternode, assign a new Elastic IP, then restart it. For reasons that aren't entirely clear to me, this IP address won't display on the Masternode List and what I believe is the old IP remains:

Activating new MasterNode (cold local/remote):
Code: 
2014-06-13 13:05:52 ThreadRPCServer method=masternode
2014-06-13 13:05:52 CDarkSendPool::RegisterAsMasterNode() - Checking inbound con                                                                             nection to '54.213.87.6:19999'
2014-06-13 13:05:52 trying connection 54.213.87.6:19999 lastseen=0.0hrs
2014-06-13 13:05:53 connected 54.213.87.6:19999
2014-06-13 13:05:53 send version message: version 70018, blocks=18801, us=67.174                                                                             .180.89:19999, them=54.213.87.6:19999, peer=54.213.87.6:19999
2014-06-13 13:05:53 Found unspent output equal to nValue
2014-06-13 13:05:53 CDarkSendPool::RegisterAsMasterNode() - Is capable master no                                                                             de!
2014-06-13 13:05:53 Added time data, samples 5, offset +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-06-13 13:05:53 nTimeOffset = +0  (+0 minutes)

The old IP (54.187.111.243) seems to appear in the list still?
Code: 
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "98.165.130.67:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.47.129:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}

Just wanted to make you guys aware of this little snag that may exist here
 
snogcel said:
Hey guys - wanted to shoot a quick update regarding that issue I had a few pages back (inbound port issues). Ended up being a st00pid elastic IP issue with Amazon, once I realized that the Elastic IP hadn't been assigned to my EC2 instance I reverted to the real IP address everything started up as expected.

I did notice a slightly strange quirk - deciding to play around with things a bit, I decided to try shutting down my Masternode, assign a new Elastic IP, then restart it. For reasons that aren't entirely clear to me, this IP address won't display on the Masternode List and what I believe is the old IP remains:

Activating new MasterNode (cold local/remote):
Code: 
2014-06-13 13:05:52 ThreadRPCServer method=masternode
2014-06-13 13:05:52 CDarkSendPool::RegisterAsMasterNode() - Checking inbound con                                                                             nection to '54.213.87.6:19999'
2014-06-13 13:05:52 trying connection 54.213.87.6:19999 lastseen=0.0hrs
2014-06-13 13:05:53 connected 54.213.87.6:19999
2014-06-13 13:05:53 send version message: version 70018, blocks=18801, us=67.174                                                                             .180.89:19999, them=54.213.87.6:19999, peer=54.213.87.6:19999
2014-06-13 13:05:53 Found unspent output equal to nValue
2014-06-13 13:05:53 CDarkSendPool::RegisterAsMasterNode() - Is capable master no                                                                             de!
2014-06-13 13:05:53 Added time data, samples 5, offset +0 (+0 minutes)
2014-06-13 13:05:53 nTimeOffset = +0  (+0 minutes)

The old IP (54.187.111.243) seems to appear in the list still?
Code: 
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "98.165.130.67:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.47.129:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}

Just wanted to make you guys aware of this little snag that may exist here
Click to expand...

Did you generate a new masternode key or reuse the old one when changing the IP?
 
flare said:
Did you generate a new masternode key or reuse the old one when changing the IP?
Click to expand...

I didn't immediately generate a new key, however after a couple attempts to start I realized that could have something to do with the problem - a new key was generated from local and set on both local and remote
 
I really appreciate your help, chaeplin. I know it's some kind of connection problem. My Amazon daemons can see eachother, but my local can't see either. I've opened up port 19999 for my local on my router, and I've opened up my Amazon security group settings to 19999, as well as my iptables. I've tried it with all ports open on Amazon as well. I'm using Ubuntu 14.04 in both places and I've waited 45 minutes but my local still can't see my remote. Plus I have addnode:remote:19999 in my config file hoping it would pick it ups faster. Wow, I really am stuck. I'm suspecting my local is the problem though... gonna keep trying :)
 
TanteStefana said:
I really appreciate your help, chaeplin. I know it's some kind of connection problem. My Amazon daemons can see eachother, but my local can't see either. I've opened up port 19999 for my local on my router, and I've opened up my Amazon security group settings to 19999, as well as my iptables. I've tried it with all ports open on Amazon as well. I'm using Ubuntu 14.04 in both places and I've waited 45 minutes but my local still can't see my remote. Plus I have addnode:remote:19999 in my config file hoping it would pick it ups faster. Wow, I really am stuck. I'm suspecting my local is the problem though... gonna keep trying :)
Click to expand...
In my setup, I haven't opened local 19999 from outside.

Fir start remote with masternode=1, masternodeprivkey=key from local machine.
Let it synced fully.

Next I start my local machine without masternode=1, masternodeaddr, and masternodeprivkey.
Just addnode=remote ip is used. check block height is correct.

I have checked connection to remote is made.
Open cmd window, telnet remote_ip 19999

Then stop local, add config. start it.

then masternode start pass..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
eduffield said:
So I figured out what was caused inactive masternodes to be paid, it's also causing the rest of our problems with masternodes payments. We should see payments on ~99.9% of blocks now!

https://github.com/darkcoinproject/darkcoin/commit/f9d005f79ac391f9090c8d00cca61c1d4b33da0d
Click to expand...

Thanks for that - sorry to bother you but i think that the fix is not sufficient. IHMO it fixes the selection routine, but not the bug in the active/inactive state.

Code: 
--> getting list of masternodes

testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind masternode list
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}

--> stopping one of my other remote nodes now and asking for list again

testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind masternode list
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 0,    <--- correct
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}

--> asking for only  active nodes now

testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind masternode list active
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 0,   <---- wrong, entry should not show up
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}
testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind getinfo
{
    "version" : 101001,
    "protocolversion" : 70018,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 5662.89696663,
    "blocks" : 18846,
    "timeoffset" : 0,
    "connections" : 11,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 0.38774206,
    "testnet" : true,
    "keypoololdest" : 1401692771,
    "keypoolsize" : 101,
    "paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
    "mininput" : 0.00001000,
    "errors" : ""
}
 
flare said:
Thanks for that - sorry to bother you but i think that the fix is not sufficient. IHMO it fixes the selection routine, but not the bug in the active/inactive state.

Code: 
testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind masternode list
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}

--> stopping one of my other remote nodes now

testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind masternode list
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 0,    <--- correct
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}

--> asking for just active nodes now

testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind masternode list active
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 0,   <---- wrong, entry should not show up
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}
testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind getinfo
{
    "version" : 101001,
    "protocolversion" : 70018,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 5662.89696663,
    "blocks" : 18846,
    "timeoffset" : 0,
    "connections" : 11,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 0.38774206,
    "testnet" : true,
    "keypoololdest" : 1401692771,
    "keypoolsize" : 101,
    "paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
    "mininput" : 0.00001000,
    "errors" : ""
}
Click to expand...


masternode list == masternode list active in code.
So it just not filter out 0 flag entry, I think, cosmetic.

Code: 
if (strCommand == "list")
{
std::string strCommand = "active";
if (params.size() == 2){
strCommand = params[1].get_str().c_str();
}

~~~

if(strCommand == "active"){
obj.push_back(Pair(mn.addr.ToString().c_str(), (int)mn.IsEnabled()));

EDIT
Code: 
   bool IsEnabled()

    {

        return enabled == 1;

    }
 
Last edited by a moderator:
chaeplin said:
masternode list == masternode list active in code.
So it just not filter out 0 flag entry, I think, cosmetic.
Click to expand...

Nah, i don't think so. The RPC command is using the IsEnabled() method, which is always returning true, and the method is not only used by RPC interface - so the impact might be more than cosmetic.
 
flare said:
Thanks for that - sorry to bother you but i think that the fix is not sufficient. IHMO it fixes the selection routine, but not the bug in the active/inactive state.

Code: 
--> getting list of masternodes

testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind masternode list
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}

--> stopping one of my other remote nodes now and asking for list again

testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind masternode list
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 0,    <--- correct
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}

--> asking for only  active nodes now

testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind masternode list active
{
    "54.76.47.232:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.248.36:19999" : 1,
    "54.86.103.191:19999" : 1,
    "84.25.161.117:19999" : 1,
    "23.242.106.27:19999" : 1,
    "188.226.243.116:19999" : 1,
    "107.170.200.102:19999" : 1,
    "108.61.199.47:19999" : 1,
    "37.187.216.11:19999" : 1,
    "54.209.226.236:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.148:19999" : 1,
    "184.73.179.187:19999" : 0,   <---- wrong, entry should not show up
    "184.73.179.196:19999" : 1,
    "54.178.139.242:19999" : 1,
    "54.187.111.243:19999" : 1,
    "54.255.159.230:19999" : 1
}
testnet3@ip-10-65-166-48:~/.darkcoin$ ./darkcoind getinfo
{
    "version" : 101001,
    "protocolversion" : 70018,
    "walletversion" : 60000,
    "balance" : 5662.89696663,
    "blocks" : 18846,
    "timeoffset" : 0,
    "connections" : 11,
    "proxy" : "",
    "difficulty" : 0.38774206,
    "testnet" : true,
    "keypoololdest" : 1401692771,
    "keypoolsize" : 101,
    "paytxfee" : 0.00000000,
    "mininput" : 0.00001000,
    "errors" : ""
}
Click to expand...

Active shows the active status, not just active nodes.


Code: 
        if (strCommand != "active" && strCommand != "vin" && strCommand != "pubkey" && strCommand != "lastseen" && strCommand != "activeseconds"){
            throw runtime_error(
                "list supports 'active', 'vin', 'pubkey', 'lastseen', 'activeseconds'\n");
        }

        Object obj;
        BOOST_FOREACH(CMasterNode mn, darkSendMasterNodes) {
            mn.Check(); 

            if(strCommand == "active"){
                obj.push_back(Pair(mn.addr.ToString().c_str(),       (int)mn.IsEnabled()));
            }
        }
        return obj;
 
Shoud I update testnet clinet using master now ?
Code: 
1 "subver" : "/nodestratum/",
5 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.10.10/",
1 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.10.10.1/", <------
1 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.10.9.10/",
7 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.10.9.13/",
1 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.10.9.4/",
2 "subver" : "/Satoshi:0.9.4.13/",
 
Last edited by a moderator:
eduffield said:
Active shows the active status, not just active nodes.
Click to expand...

Hmm, so whats the use of the command then? If 'masternode list' and 'masternode list active' return the same i don't see the ratonale :smile: - or do you differentiate between active and enabled?

eduffield said:
Code: 
        if (strCommand != "active" && strCommand != "vin" && strCommand != "pubkey" && strCommand != "lastseen" && strCommand != "activeseconds"){
            throw runtime_error(
                "list supports 'active', 'vin', 'pubkey', 'lastseen', 'activeseconds'\n");
        }

        Object obj;
        BOOST_FOREACH(CMasterNode mn, darkSendMasterNodes) {
            mn.Check();

            if(strCommand == "active"){
                obj.push_back(Pair(mn.addr.ToString().c_str(),       (int)mn.IsEnabled()));
            }
        }
        return obj;
Click to expand...

Yes, and (int)mn.IsEnabled()) always returns true/1 - there is no method for changing value of 'enabled' variable of https://github.com/darkcoinproject/darkcoin/blob/master/src/main.h#L2437 - or do i miss something? I have to say that i'm used to access class variables via methods (get/set) only, and i don't like poking directly at their value :grin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top