[RC5] Wheres the blocks?
rc5 at xfiles.nildram.co.uk
rc5 at xfiles.nildram.co.uk
Sun Jan 10 02:08:17 EST 1999
On Sat, 9 Jan 1999, Denie Andriessen wrote:
> Hi there,
> >So I'm looking at the stats and I see 102% send, 16% checked. With only
> >16% turned in it is a bit early to start recycling; assuming that the
> >other 84% has not been lost, but is out being processed.
> Well, I might be already quite late to start recyling. As from previous
To both of you: What IS a good time to start recycling??
We HAVE to start recycling after we reach 100% sent - otherwise
many clients would have no blocks to crack.
If we start to recycle before 100% we reduce the time clients have
to hand in their blocks (therefore we increase the probability of
> information that could be gathered by the proxys, information like
> the number of blocks that get downloaded, that time it take for
> a specifiec email to respond, how they react during a 'weekend'
> (eg, machine of or on etc) a more efficient approach could be
> taken. By excluding machines that end to take eg about a week
> to reply their bloks to receive block for a short contest, it should
> be able te reduce the amount of double work, by not sending
> them any (for the sake of this argument) DES blocks.... To send
Even if they end up doing duplicate work, there is a HIGH chance
they will do SOME non-duplicate work, therefore not giving them
blocks is un-productive.
> reclycle block to machines that have been known to reply quickly,
> it could be able to keep keep up with the arguments previously
> mentioned here about the starting point of the EFF boys..
> Of course less worst strategic disadvantage would be gained
> by choosing al blocks at random from the whole keyspace.
Anyway, we are co-operating with EFF for DES-III (and DES-TEST-II
if I am not mistaken [is IIANM an acronym? It is something I would
expect to be, but I've never seen it]). Which blocks we hand out
makes no (statistical) difference.
> >I appreciate the open approach of d.net not to stop RC5 while DES is on,
> >and obviously not for the test. But a solution may be needed to see
> >that recycling is not started so early.
> With this type of aproach it is unavoidable that blocks get recycled.
> Comparably to the whole RC5 keyspace it does not do any significant
Stopping RC5 would increase the speed that blocks are distributed,
therefore decreasing the time before block recycling begins (however,
it would also increase our keyrate, assuming everyone switched - see next
However, certain people's computers are very innefient at DES, are not
running a recent enough client to do DES (and closing RC5, even
temporarily could blow up those clients, im sure), or just plain dont
want to do DES.
> >An easy way to do this I am not sure. But perhaps n blocks could be
> >sent to everyone, and then when you turn one in, you get one more? Or no
> >more until the buffer is processed.
> >From stats that could be figured out by the keysevers it is possible
> for any IP/email to get a more appropriate setting: eg: fast replying
> machines larger blocks, slow replying machines a different contest.. (?)
Uhh... Basically, no.
> >Does anyone know where the hell those blocks are? Do some people have
> >buffers set to 10 000 blocks on there home P166? I would even expect
> >people who went back to RC5 to have the courtesy to complete what
> >remains in there buffer before switching back.
I think a major part of it is caused by a bug in the 30x pproxies - if
you set it to get X RC5/DES blocks, it ignores you and downloads thousends
As for peopel who went back to RC5, I don't think many people would switch
BACK. Maybe they just wouldn't switch, but I doubt they would go back to
RC5 - some would, after it autoswitched, because they like their stats,
but hopefully not a significant amount.
> Also this could be controled from the information that could be gathered
> by this test contest... I wonder if any is stored... It would make a nice
> excersice to try and 'build' a formula that keeps the client into 'top'
> condition for the current contest.. I don't think it's even very hard on
> the maths part.. The machines would probably be the bottleneck....
Not everyone took part in the test, some people could get new PCs.. etc,
> >And I guess we get to see what happens when the key space is exhausted
> >after all :)
> Yeah, lets just see what happens....
Er, if by 'the key space is exhausted' you mean 100% CHECKED, well, if
that happens, everyone blows up.
If you mean 100% sent, well, isnt that what this email was about?
dtaylor at NOSPAM.xfiles.nildram.co.uk
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest
More information about the rc5