--- Day changed Mon Oct 02 2017
00:14 -!- coins123_ [~coins123@195.32.46.14] has joined #joinmarket     
00:18 -!- coins123 [~coins123@unaffiliated/coins123] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]     
00:31 -!- delinquentme [~delinquen@2602:306:ceb7:990:5013:8fea:6360:15ed] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
01:36 -!- coins123_ [~coins123@195.32.46.14] has quit []     
01:38 -!- coins123 [~coins123@195.32.46.14] has joined #joinmarket     
01:38 -!- coins123 [~coins123@195.32.46.14] has quit [Changing host]     
01:38 -!- coins123 [~coins123@unaffiliated/coins123] has joined #joinmarket     
02:19 < waxwing> missed 6hr conf timeout on a couple yesterday; maybe 48 or 72 hours is the more appropriate default conf timeout.
02:22 < waxwing> means not in yigenstatement (trivial), also means new coins not found for offers until you restart. sync_unspent only called during run in confirm_callback. not so trivial.
02:34 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has joined #joinmarket     
02:34 < timothy> hi, I'm trying to use joinmarket-clientserver, but I have: "ImportError: No module named electrum.bitcoin"
02:42 < waxwing> timothy, that's a misleading error message, it means you haven't got secp256k1 installed (almost certainly)
02:43 < timothy> waxwing: ohhhh, ok
02:43 < waxwing> if you go into a python prompt and type `import secp256k1` you'll presumably find it errors
02:43 < waxwing> which OS?
02:43 < timothy> archlinux
02:44 < waxwing> ok. i'll ping arubi as he's more likely to know what might be needed, but ofc you'd have to find the error messages. i presume you're currently in the virtualenv (called jmvenv by default)?
02:44 < timothy> I'm relaunching python setupall.py --daemon
02:44 < waxwing> you could try re-running `pip install secp256k1` if so to find out what the error is.
02:44 < timothy> (inside the venv)
02:44 < waxwing> the daemon doesn't have a secp256k1 dependency
02:45 < timothy> oh so it's only client-bitcoin?
02:45 < waxwing> yeah
02:45 < waxwing> i'd suggest just doing the pip install secp256k1 i suggested, since there's a 90% chance that's the package that's causing the problem
03:04 -!- MaxSan [~one@213.152.162.79] has joined #joinmarket     
03:06 < timothy> waxwing: it worked by building + installing libsecp256k1 (the C one) from git and than pip worked
03:06 < timothy> maybe the builtin secp256k1 doesn't build with new gcc or something similar
03:07 < waxwing> timothy, cool. that sounds similar to what happened to a couple of other people on linuces where it didn't work out of the box.
03:08 < timothy> maybe guide should be updated (like on libsodium)
04:23 < waxwing> timothy, thanks if you can write a quick pastebin with the commands you used
04:37 -!- MaxSan [~one@213.152.162.79] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]     
06:55 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #joinmarket     
08:37 < quitobro> hey guys, i want to do a normal btc tx to move coins out of my JM wallet. i can use the bitcoin core wallet directly, right? i want to set a custom fee (0-5 satoshis/byte) so that it’s cheap
08:53 < adlai> quitobro: use sendpayment.py -N0, and configure your tx_fees config variable appropriately
08:53 < adlai> JM wallets are watchonly from bitcoin core's perspective
08:53 < quitobro> adlai: thanks, tx_fees config is satoshis/byte?
08:54 < adlai> # You can also set your own fee/kb: any number higher than 144 will
08:54 < adlai> # be interpreted as the fee in satoshi per kB that you wish to use
09:09 < quitobro> adlai: thank you
09:09 < adlai> you're welcome
09:11 < quitobro> adlai: sorry to be a pain, but is this documented somewhere?
09:12 < adlai> it's in the default joinmarket.cfg, maybe yours hasn't been autogenerated in a while
09:13 < adlai> quitobro: https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket/blob/master/joinmarket/configure.py#L134-L144
09:13 < quitobro> ur the man, thanks :)
09:14 < adlai> (;     
09:15 < quitobro> interesting, so one can set `tx_fees = n` or equivalently set the number of makers to a value > 144 e.g. `-N=3000` (3000 satoshis/byte)
09:15 < quitobro> tx_fees in joinmarket.conf is equivalent to number of makers, but only when N > 144?
09:16 < quitobro> i want to use 0 satoshis/byte lol… so i think I’ll just do -N 0 and set tx_fees=0 in joinmarket.conf
09:19 < quitobro> adlai: sound reasonable?
09:20 < adlai> that won't work
09:21 < adlai> also, the -N isn't related to tx_fees
09:21 < adlai> I guess the best you can get without mucking around too much is 0.144 sat/byte
09:21 < timothy> sat/kbyte I hope
09:21 < timothy> uhm no
09:22 < adlai> timothy: quitobro specifically wants to send with the lowest possible fee
09:22 < timothy> I think the min is 5 satoshi / byte
09:23 < adlai> there's no minimum, although nodes might not relay below a certain (cofigurable) level
09:23 < quitobro> oh hm the comments in the link u sent me make it sound like setting a value of N > 144 will be treated as tx fees in satoshis/kbyte
09:23 < adlai> quitobro: right, so eg tx_fees=2000 will get you 2sat/byte
09:23 < timothy> yes, there is a minimum to have a "standard" tx. tx with lower feeds than the minimum are seen as dust
09:23 < quitobro> oooh that N, not the number of makers N
09:24 < quitobro> (face meet palm)
09:24 < quitobro> do u know if it’s >= or just > 144
09:24 < quitobro> i’ll do 145 just in case
09:28 < adlai> quitobro: https://github.com/joinmarket-org/joinmarket/blob/master/joinmarket/blockchaininterface.py#L145
09:41 < waxwing> quitobro, someone else noted that recently - the fact that it's called "N" in the config file, but is totally unrelated to -N is .. somewhat confusing, sorry.
09:41 < quitobro> hm the transaction appears to be sent (i.e. sendpayment prints a “Transaction sent: <some tx id>” before “done”) but doesn’t seem to be broadcasting to the bitcoin network
09:42 < waxwing> quitobro, some explorers don't pick up immediately .. but wait, you used 145?
09:42 < quitobro> waxwing: yes
09:42 < waxwing> that's ... not a good idea. that's 0.145 satoshis/byte
09:43 < quitobro> well the mempool until today was very empty
09:43 < quitobro> recently it’s been pretty empty, rather
09:43 < waxwing> yeah but (a) "the" mempool (cough) is not empty today and (b) less than 5 and there's a good chance of not getting relayed etc.
09:44 < waxwing> as discussed above no magic number but i wouldn't go lower than 5-10 personally.
09:44 < quitobro> why is it not relayed though
09:44 < waxwing> well i don't relay stuff < 5 for one :)
09:44 < quitobro> oh you configure your node to ignore tx’s w/ super low tx fees?
09:44 < waxwing> nodes have limited resources, so, i don't know. yes, i do.
09:45 < waxwing> it was more relevant about a year ago i think.
09:45 < quitobro> during the spam attacks?
09:46 < waxwing> yeah. the earlier forms thereof.
09:47 < quitobro> i was able to send a 1 satoshi/byte transaction from my ledger wallet the other day, so are these “low fee per byte” transactions not propagating to the bitcoin network b/c of JM logic regarding ignoring low fee transactions?
09:47 < quitobro> or their nodes are just configured differently?
09:47 < waxwing> no jm just does pushtx()
09:48 < quitobro> i imagine ledger runs nodes which are less conservative on that...
09:48 < waxwing> JM does not filter out any fee, but don't be surprised if you get slightly flaky results out on the network in general (e.g. block explorers) with 1 sat/byte.
09:49 < waxwing> also it is not super-friendly to your counterparties locking up their utxos for potentially days ... (we really should have fixed that by now)
09:56 -!- timothy [tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]     
10:10 < quitobro> waxwing: i’m just doing a normal txfer not a coinjoin withdrawal...
10:10 < quitobro> but that is an interesting comment. i see how that would lock up their UTXOs
10:11 < waxwing> quitobro, well it's not particularly fair for us to expect a user to even think of it.
10:11 < waxwing> we discussed more than once this being a problem, the maker should choose to reject fees < X , but, hasn't been done.
10:11 < waxwing> also it's extremely tricky of course because fee conditions can change very rapidly.
10:12 < quitobro> yea you have to rely on (potentially flaky) estimates like you mentioned...
12:53 -!- coins123 [~coins123@unaffiliated/coins123] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
12:55 -!- coins123 [~coins123@unaffiliated/coins123] has joined #joinmarket     
13:12 -!- zxccxz [5db781f6@gateway/web/freenode/ip.93.183.129.246] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
13:48 -!- wats0n [54d2426f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.84.210.66.111] has joined #joinmarket     
13:49 < wats0n> Is it possible to use joinmarket for BCC?
15:10 -!- zxccxz [5db781f6@gateway/web/freenode/ip.93.183.129.246] has joined #joinmarket     
15:30 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: quitobro]     
15:33 -!- wats0n [54d2426f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.84.210.66.111] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
15:35 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #joinmarket     
15:36 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Client Quit]     
19:09 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #joinmarket     
19:42 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: quitobro]     
19:44 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-204-28-214-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
19:52 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #joinmarket     
21:44 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: quitobro]     
23:58 < GithubBot5678> [joinmarket] adlai pushed 1 new commit to develop: https://git.io/vdCQC
23:58 < GithubBot5678> joinmarket/develop 02c5c96 Adlai Chandrasekhar: include forgotten option