Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - eRoh

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22
FIMK Markets and trading / Re: Warmach's OpenLedger Gateway Closed
« on: March 20, 2017, 06:43:38 PM »
I still have FIMKRYPTO balance and trading strong. Any news?

FIMK Markets and trading / Re: Warmach's OpenLedger Gateway Closed
« on: March 08, 2017, 08:37:13 AM »
My intent was to stop trading completely.  I have updated the asset to require  issuer approval for trades and white listing holders.  In theory, this should prevent trades, but my questions to the Bitshares forum have not given me an exact answer on how to do it.  I guess Bitshares is still new enough that no one has tried to stop trading.

At least the trading seems still operational: I've had some successful trades this week after the announcement.

FIMK Markets and trading / Re: Warmach's OpenLedger Gateway Closed
« on: March 06, 2017, 06:06:37 PM »
I have decided to close down this gateway.  The biggest reasons are low volume and the current legal environment regarding cryptocurrency in my home country. 

If you would like to pull your FIMKRYPTO out of OpenLedger, please follow the standard withdraw routine...

Transfer your FIMK out of OpenLedger
     a.  Transfer your FIMKRYPTO asset to my asset owning account, "warmach"
     b.  Include your FIMK network address in the memo field where you want the FIMK transfered

I will allow about two weeks for withdrawals to be requested.  After that, I will take remaining balances greater than 1 FIMKRYTPO and issue FIMK asset as a replacement. 

Here are the balances as of the closing of this service.

Have you considered, when will the related exchange pairs be closed? At the same time or just a little bit before closing donw the gateway?

*Didn't know if there had been major changes over the last year that would have made the old pass phrases non-usable.

Maybe Dirk can confirm, but I think trailing newlines were prevented in some older versions. Besides that, I wouldn't think there are any other differences in the passphrase handling.

Any whitespace differences? Try e.g. with/without newline at the end of the string, etc. ...

Yleinen FIMK-keskustelu / Re: Selvennystä Fimk Heat juttuihin
« on: February 08, 2017, 07:59:11 AM »
onko Fimk siirtymässä kokonaan Heatiin?
Ei, FIMK on edelleen itsenäinen lohkoketju / peer-to-peer -verkosto. Korjatkaa, jos olen väärässä.

Pystynkö vaihtamaan nyt jossain Fimkejä Heatiin?
Jo nythän kaupankäyni onnistuu periaatteessa tuolta:
Tosin voimassaolevia tarjouksia ei ole, mutta pitkon kautta kiepauttamalla kauppa käy:

Markkinat ja treidaus / Re: Markkinakatsaus
« on: February 04, 2017, 05:12:41 PM »

Technical Discussion / Re: Main FIMK node service interruption
« on: January 10, 2017, 07:40:17 AM »
Forgot to mention: I had to restore from a backup from December a couple of times on both of my servers before they started staying on the main chain.

Technical Discussion / Re: Main FIMK node service interruption
« on: January 09, 2017, 07:31:55 AM »
This seems to have caused some instability in the network: for example my server and Warmach's pool have forked several times. Could you have a look, what might be wrong?

Technical Discussion / Re: Network status
« on: January 01, 2017, 12:31:01 PM »
To support the small forgers, I decided to give 10 000 FIMK to each of those forging with less than a million FIMK. Beware, there might be similar rags in the future! And if somebody can convince me that they might start forging and commit to the task, I can make a donation up to 100k. Just private message me, and make your "business plan pitch"!

Donation round 2 sent. Let me know, if I missed somebody. Happy New Year!

General FIMK Discussion / Re: Forging Service - Anyone Interested?
« on: November 14, 2016, 06:44:06 AM »
The more I think about it, the more I think you are right.  One server can forge with multiple addresses, but each server has its own local blockchain.  What we really need is more individual blockchain (a.k.a. servers) so that there is a greater consensus on the chain and less chance of forks.

Well, I have a primary server that forges for the pool, but I also have backup servers.  Each backup server also forges in the event that primary server goes down or hits a fork.  If I have 3 servers running, I'm not sure it matters if I split the forging accounts among them or just use the pool account on all three.  In the end, I think it is how many server nodes are on the network, not how the forging accounts are spread out among them.
I think that besides the number of servers/blockchains, the "equality" of them is also important. If you split an "overpowered" balance to two servers, that should even out the "voting". But I'm on thin ice here, maybe Dirk or somebody can clarify...

One question I do have, If I have 3 servers running behind one public IP, do we get the stability effect of 3 nodes?  Or does it just act as one?
I've sometimes suspected that having multiple servers behind one NAT can cause problems, but I'm not sure if it was because of that or something else.

General FIMK Discussion / Re: Forging Service - Anyone Interested?
« on: November 13, 2016, 10:32:08 AM »
I'm not sure, if that would help. If I've understood correctly, the number of servers (and the distribution of balances between the servers) is more relevant than the number of forging accounts. If you have multiple accounts forging on the same server, wouldn't they all end up in the same fork*? At least the opposite is true: I have one account forging on 2-3 servers at a time, and the servers end up in forks independently of each other. And only the "correct" one is shown in, of course.

What might work better, could be that warmach and/or any other "too" large server split in two, dividing the balance between two servers. For a pool, it would require moving half of the forgers (balances) to another server. For starters, warmach could move his own balance forging to another (account and) server. Also the forging support from association could run on multiple servers (if not already running). What do you think?

*) I'm using the term fork here in a wider sense: any chain of blocks, regardless of the "correctness" of that particular chain in consensus of the network.

Technical Discussion / Re: Network status
« on: November 10, 2016, 05:39:59 PM »
If you look at this account (FIM-YAZR-6U3M-DKAC-GCZTV) you might notice that something drastic changed around 17.Oct.2016. Two+ weeks before that (1-17.Oct) 42 blocks forged. The last three weeks (18.Oct-10.Nov) 12 blocks or 4 blocks in last two weeks. No change in setup or account balance. What's your math on that being fair?

Can't say for sure, but I'd suspect that it's been forking off and back on. There have been several disturbances in the network this autumn, including the pools, so that's quite plausible explanation. Maybe you could verify this from your server's logs. It's a good idea to occasionally check last blocks from the browser:
If that doesn't match (and several of the last ones are your account), you're probably on a fork (even though the server hasn't detected it yet).

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22