-
m-relay
<hbs:matrix.org> Can TF be merged mined with Monero using p2pool?
-
moneromooo
No. It is possible in theory, but p2pool uses some field in a way that's incompatible.
-
moneromooo
It'd need a fork to fix this. And I don't have the drive to fix this anymore.
-
MaddieKalan
Whats the minimum amount of bandwidth I should have available to keep the monero blockchain up to date in real time?
-
m-relay
<ofrnxmr:monero.social> Data allotment or up/down speeds?
-
m-relay
<ofrnxmr:monero.social> Can get away with about 4gb/day or well under 30kbps, but not good for mining.
-
m-relay
<ofrnxmr:monero.social> 300kb/s should download a block in ~1 second
-
sech1
Monero has 20-25k transactions per day. Average transaction size is 2-2.5 kb, so you can stay in sync for as little as 50-60 Mb traffic
-
sech1
But in reality Monero node uses 50-100 KB/s bandwidth
-
sech1
Or maybe it's just my node that has a lot of connections
-
moneromooo
My seed node averages about 275 kB/s over the last 4 months (cumulative up and down). So that's a comfortably high bound.
-
MaddieKalan
ofrnxmr whats good for mineing then?
-
m-relay
<ofrnxmr:monero.social> Priority connections to mining pool or largenodes
-
sech1
I'd say 10 Mbit connection if you're running a node (mining solo or on p2pool). And yes, connections to other mining pool nodes
-
MaddieKalan
supportxmr and hashcault good?
-
MaddieKalan
vault*
-
sech1
Yes
-
m-relay
<kilopool:matrix.org> I disagree, both supportxmr and hashvault have more than 20% of network hashrate.
-
m-relay
<kilopool:matrix.org> If one of them colludes with the biggest pool (nanopool.org), they could 51% attack Monero.
-
m-relay
<kilopool:matrix.org> You should mine either in P2Pool (best option), or in smaller pools (good smaller pools are kilopool.com, herominers.com, gntl.uk, monerod.org, minexmr2.com, aterx.com...)
-
sech1
He meant connecting to pool nodes, not mining on those pools
-
sech1
You connect to other pool's nodes to get blocks from those pools faster
-
m-relay
<karano:poddery.com> In monero , even if a pool had more than 51% hashrate , their is only a limited things a pool can do , instead of a whole "attack"
-
m-relay
<karano:poddery.com> They can't write any transactions to the block by themselves
-
m-relay
<kilopool:matrix.org> Yes, in Monero a pool with more than 51% of the hashrate can "just" do a reorg and reverse transactions, so they can spend their money again after having sent it.
-
m-relay
<kilopool:matrix.org> Which is exactly what happens in Bitcoin too.
-
m-relay
<karano:poddery.com> No , i don't think they can double spend
-
sech1
They can
-
m-relay
<karano:poddery.com> They can but , if they do they will create distrust in the network , which will indirectly affect themselves
-
m-relay
<karano:poddery.com> They can but , if they do they will create distrust in the network , which will indirectly affect themselves and their investment in mining xmr
-
sech1
We can always consider hostile pool takeover for this scenario (i.e. government, or hackers)
-
sech1
so entities who don't care about network trust
-
moneromooo
They can only "double spend" in the sense that they can nuke an earlier spend and spend those inputs again, since they are no longer spent on the chain they mine. They still can't spend an output more than once on whatever chain they mine.
-
moneromooo
So one can protect against this by requiring N blocks before acting on a payment (with the assumption that the attacker will not have >50% for too long, or that a 40% attacker will not be so lucky with more blocks).
-
m-relay
<polar9669:matrix.org> They don’t need to invest, they can rent it