Namecoin Forum

One more thing: I initially thought that we could still allow ordinary mining for testnet and regtest mode (where it does not matter that you may get two blocks at once by merge-mining with Namecoin itself). But I think this makes things more complicated, thus I suggest that we remove ordinary PoW ...

domob wrote:Thanks for your work on this - sounds great! I'm unfortunately too busy at the moment to give it a try - but I think this is a good step forward!

It would be nice if someone could give it a try as I would like to claim the bounty.

Latest infos on Github: https://github.com/phelix/npkh Allows you to make sure you are using the right PGP key by getting a secure pgp key fingerprint from a Namecoin id/ :mrgreen: [continued from https://forum.namecoin.info/viewtopic.php?p=16117#p16117] (edited a lot; 2017-08-10 and 2017-12-15)

Ah yes, I recall now - it was about the midstate compression. This seems to be a nice trick and I think it is used by some other coins and applications; but I cannot really comment on its security implications, as I'm not a cryptography expert. I guess that such "hacks" tend to potentially weaken t...

Fix the value size bug (1024 bytes) or even increase the value size to 2,5k as discussed earlier (this does not really make flooding any easier but will simplify some legit use).

I don't know too much about what exactly the benefits and (more importantly) the implementation challenges for P2Pool "MMv2" are. Well, forrestv seems to be of the opinion that it is necessary to allow "non-solo" p2pool mining. As for the challenges I think it is relatively easy to implement* but m...

Created a separate thread for MM2: https://forum.namecoin.info/viewtopic.php?p=16183

Should we call the (intermediate) solution above MM1b?

There is a hardfork coming up: Changing merge-mining format for BIP9 Maybe we should use it to also implement MM2. This would allow P2Pool mining with reasonable income variance. https://github.com/p2pool/p2pool/issues/265 https://github.com/forrestv/mm2-spec Can we reuse code from P2Pool / somewher...

biolizard89 wrote:Should I ping Luke-Jr and see what he thinks about this topic? He's always given us good advice, and he's knowledgeable about merged mining.

Sure can't hurt.

ok, then I guess one minimal solution would be: 0. all blocks must be merge mined 1. auxPOW nonce must always be chainID 2. parent nonce must never be chainID :mrgreen: :?: Yes, this is what I'm thinking about. Except that 2) is not necessary, because 0) already ensures that PoW cannot be reused - ...