'bitmessagesettings', 'defaultpayloadlengthextrabytes') NonceTrialsPerByte = workDefaultProofOfWorkNonceTrialsPerByte If nonceTrialsPerByte <</a> workDefaultProofOfWorkNonceTrialsPerByte: 'bitmessagesettings', 'defaultnoncetrialsperbyte') 'which it cannot do.\n' % addressVersionNumber) 'been given a request to create at least one version %s address ' + 'Program error: For some reason the address generator queue has ' + 'Here is the queueValue: %s\n' % repr(queueValue)) 'number of values was passed into the addressGeneratorQueue. ('Programming error: A structure with the wrong ' + NumberOfNullBytesDemandedOnFrontOfRipeHash = 1 # The defaultĬommand, addressVersionNumber, streamNumber, label, numberOfAddressesToMake, deterministicPassphrase, eighteenByteRipe, nonceTrialsPerByte, payloadLengthExtraBytes = queueValue NumberOfNullBytesDemandedOnFrontOfRipeHash = 2 'bitmessagesettings', 'numberofnullbytesonaddress')
NumberOfNullBytesDemandedOnFrontOfRipeHash = ( StreamNumber = decodeAddress(chanAddress)Ĭommand, addressVersionNumber, streamNumber, label, numberOfAddressesToMake, deterministicPassphrase, eighteenByteRipe = queueValue NumberOfNullBytesDemandedOnFrontOfRipeHash = 1Ĭommand, chanAddress, label, deterministicPassphrase = queueValueĪddressVersionNumber = decodeAddress(chanAddress) QueueValue = ()Ĭommand, addressVersionNumber, streamNumber, label, deterministicPassphrase = queueValue Msg="ciphertext
Self.assertEqual(len(ciphertext), block_size) Iv = _IV(ciphername)Įnc_ctx = pyelliptic.Cipher(key=key, iv=iv, "Helper: Encrypt, then decrypt random message"īlock_size = _blocksize(ciphername) bit domains is going to be noticeably higher than your estimate of 383.Īnyway, excellent work, this will give me something to play with next weekend.Def _encdec(self, ciphername, msg=None, key=None, iv=None): bit domains that use non-DNS resolution, e.g. domob.bit uses "import", which works in ncdns but I guess doesn't work for your software). bit domains, because some domains use JSON attributes that you're not currently supporting (e.g. It should be noted that you're undercounting the full set of "in-use". (Of course, since it's possible that a few of the domains are being used for malware, I don't recommend that anyone reading this thread visit random domains from the list unless they're doing so in a VM.) Third checkbox is for view only that domains which responded on HTTP request and don`t parked at .Ĭool, I'll have to take a look through this list and see what these domains are being used for. Second checkbox is for view only that domains which have DNS data. Virus_net wrote:Now you can easily get list of all. Thanks for the suggestion, I've added a GitHub issue for it at That said, I can definitely see some value add in making the RPC interface check for JSON validity, as long as the check is easy to disable for people who know what they're doing (or who think they do, anyway ). Also Namecoin might migrate in the future from JSON to CBOR as the standard convention (due to CBOR's decreased tendency to bloat the blockchain). It should be noted that JSON encoding is solely a convention in Namecoin (Namecoin's consensus rules simply treat the name and value fields as arbitrary binary blobs). In PRC only validation of if it`s a valid JSON object and in GUI plus object data validation. Strictness of verification maybe different. I think that checks will be good everywhere. Why 50 ? Because people are lazy now and people always doing mistakes (copy-paste), it`s people nature I think the best data in value field are these:īiolizard89 wrote: although generally I figure people who are using the RPC interface are capable of doing those checks themselves. If someone interested in debug log of the script it is avaliable here: So only 2063 domains from 72408 has usefull data and can be tried for resolv and access. Usefull data found (ip or ns or alias): 2063 domains No useful data found (ip or ns or alias): 23087 domains Value field JSON parse error: 16079 domains
So, I wrote script that get data by command name_filter with regexp ^d/()?$. bit websites, which would also give us useful information on how much real-world usage there is of. In related work, Jonas has been doing some experiments with making the YaCy search engine crawl. This would indeed be useful information to have. bit have 72320 domain names but we can`t understand now how many of them really used/working. I want to do graph that can show how many domain names was at that date, how many of them was expired at that date and how many of them resolving/working.īecause for today. Virus_net wrote:Now I`am working at domain names statistics script.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |