Running A Full Node - Bitcoin

Bitcoin core full node upload bandwidth usage

I've had my first bitcoin core full node running for 24hrs as of this morning and it's sent 25gb of data in that time, is that about right, higher or lower than normal?
Edit: what do I need to put in the config file to limit the upload data as that's way too much for me to keep it running 24/7, I'll get a letter from my isp warning about usage again. Despite being on an unlimited package I usually get a letter warning about fair use when I go over 750gb a month.
submitted by WeeManMike to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Rodolfo Novak: If you can say w/ a straight face that its ok to increase block size and take more space/bandwidth you never ran a bitcoin full node on your laptop 🙉

Rodolfo Novak: If you can say w/ a straight face that its ok to increase block size and take more space/bandwidth you never ran a bitcoin full node on your laptop 🙉 submitted by tasmannn to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Hacking, Distributed/State of the Bitcoin Network: "In other words, the provisioned bandwidth of a typical full node is now 1.7X of what it was in 2016. The network overall is 70% faster compared to last year."

Hacking, Distributed/State of the Bitcoin Network: submitted by parban333 to btc [link] [comments]

Want to *really* help decentralization by getting more full nodes online? Code a simple bandwidth limit option (like in any decent torrent client) in Bitcoin Core so that people can actually run nodes without ruining their connection

This is a big reason why people stop running full nodes, at least home users. I've seen multiple complaints from folks saying that it eats all their bandwidth, making their internet connection nearly unusable. The result? They stop running a full node. And who can blame them?
There's been plenty of discussion on this issue for four years (!) on the Bitcoin GitHub: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/273 - I think with all this recent talk about worries of decreasing full node count, this would be a relatively non-controversial means to make running a full node much more accessible, and therefore greatly increase the number of full nodes on the network.
As it is, the user can apply supplemental bandwidth shapers and QoS rules to deal with this, e.g. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/mastecontrib/qos/tc.sh, but how many people are really going to do that - or even find out that they can?
Concerns on the GitHub issue that this will slow down the network are absurd, in my opinion - for one thing, there's no real incentive to "leech" by capping upload speed well under capacity, and for another, these people who want to regulate the speeds are just going to get frustrated and shut their nodes down completely, as many folks already have. Even if they're throttled, having a great many more nodes than we do now is going to increase the network's speed, not decrease it.
I wish that I had the coding skills to write a patch for this myself, but I do not, and so I just want to try to encourage those who can to make it a higher priority. I think that the impact of this issue has been drastically underestimated by a large number of people.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 For what it's worth (which ain't much), I'll kick in a 0.050 BTC bounty towards a working, tested pull request that implements proper bandwidth limiting in Bitcoin-Core, in a style similar to how most P2P programs do it today (either in the Preferences dialog or somewhere in the main interface). Perhaps someone with a little more in their wallet could add to that bounty. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVjGKXAAoJEJdH3pe6/Nu5mPsP/RS74L7odtEEfJWFIFwZvHLn MNBeB7yv0oegLwK27TPWb/+R+HPTEtW2/q+9xN8GzuyZnfsVoIjWb7mykQm1ILH4 TcGveXvcBYa1TeeZTBoiyrE5qDAN3I15wS+FF97+xANoYY+cmYG3MCd+ctfGT9qb m7/34ppPqTVWD/pAD/A+oIJvPpgsl1nxy78qPCeKHBaSGuCGUqwC2oMOWenwGk7w m+EwJxaWTa60i2+nsACJtUvEHAB+v3LM3dNrNlupxt+Ym47kTCSN99fDJZmvK6 ptI08tSVQz5KbDbqZ7prZdHATBsE0xrI9rMwZYMzv1Vda0vDSR4ggoJOa6JGutqa X33EmzkXk5s7p9DCpcb+4aIucTRknM/oBB/IorIL9bq+Mh6k2MIaguxb+9a446iL dsFRh55t6PAifunVkrFvQyRSqA7MZtQ3wzBP62H2b8oPLwJ4D/eF8WKAGPnUn6YP IOhhvJf9XXKrP42Tvo/cIcPhMnvAF+bMVV0AbTxWzTSHA4qwdfnPlL0AdBCQFhm0 ulCkI9VftzqwGfNl6VPurhOCK2ZGSvaEsc+Zbz2uUex/orf23ihw08ksJjUI9DVP nY82GgULW0wrusQmFmSCaHPsQi2EbUurEcvNiWRWd0ZrayT05zgjtSGregjrdwLR GbGVT+jJHBPBeH+ohbEW =aZqc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 
For signature verification, my GPG key with fingerprint 69E7 EB65 1CB6 19DE 9153 3A2B D16B 4CC5 857D 0298 is available at https://np.reddit.com/publickeyexchange/comments/2cmfob/sapiophiles_public_key/, on the major SKS keyservers and on KeyBase at https://keybase.io/sapiophile - my KeyBase proof for this reddit username can be found at https://np.reddit.com/KeybaseProofs/comments/2dfzvj/my_keybase_proof_redditsapiophile/
EDIT: Bounty is now up to 1.65 BTC + $48 in BTC (1.85 BTC total at this time), thanks to wserd, globramma2, CanaryInTheMine, hellobitcoinworld, imaginary_username, Huntred, Melting_Harps, SD7, zebrahat, jefdaj, and especially Place60! Who's next to help sweeten the pot?
submitted by sapiophile to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin core full node upload bandwidth usage /r/Bitcoin

Bitcoin core full node upload bandwidth usage /Bitcoin submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

PSA: Bitcoin full nodes under attack by Altcoin Cash supporting bitcore nodes. Spam attack coincides with bitcore attack, will drain your bandwidth. Download banbitcorecash.sh to ban them.

submitted by sumBTC to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Frustrated bitcoiner laments running a full node as all his upload bandwidth gets drained.

Frustrated bitcoiner laments running a full node as all his upload bandwidth gets drained. submitted by banished98ti to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Graph of bandwidth costs for hosting a full Bitcoin node 24/7

I've been hosting a few for a long time now. I saw there was a lot of confusion regarding the bandwidth-costs of hosting one.
Here are the results : http://i.imgur.com/caDUGsZ.png - Clickable for mobile
Some data:
Average connected nodes: 65 Max upload speed: 12 mbit/s 
June 2014 post
submitted by Dissi to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Gavin prediction that ETH full node count will continue to stay higher than Bitcoin. Even with higher bandwidth requirements. Is bandwidth really a limiter on decentralization?

Gavin prediction that ETH full node count will continue to stay higher than Bitcoin. Even with higher bandwidth requirements. Is bandwidth really a limiter on decentralization? submitted by AnonymousRev to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

How much Bandwidth does a full node and P2Pool server use? See here [X-Post /r/Bitcoin]

How much Bandwidth does a full node and P2Pool server use? See here [X-Post /Bitcoin] submitted by Tingawinga5 to BitcoinTechnology [link] [comments]

Graph: Bandwidth usage for 1 month of hosting a full Bitcoin node 24/7

Here it is again, the bandwidth usage for 1 month of hosting.
Here are the results : http://i.imgur.com/oHJOiDO.png - Clickable for mobile
Some data:
Average connected nodes: 87 Max upload speed: 37 mbit/s 
May 2014 post
submitted by Dissi to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Should Bitcoin target a "split" node/wallet architecture? i.e. (1) An online full-node in a remote datacenter, with DDoS protection, high bandwidth, and 24/7 availability... and (2) An offline wallet locally (in my home), with just my private keys - used for signing, like with cold storage or SPV.

I remember over a decade ago when some hobbyists still managed to run webservers (for websites) from their homes. (I believe this involved working around DHCP in order to get a "static" IP address.)
Nowadays of course, almost nobody runs a webserver (for websites) from their homes. They spin up a VPS someplace like Amazon EC2, DigitalOcean, etc.
However, there seems to be this massive "phobia" against running Bitcoin full-nodes in datacenters.
But on the other hand, we have already heard many people saying that:
In addition, there is the concept of "SPV" wallets (simplified payment verification), where a user holds their private keys locally but checks the corresponding (public) addresses online (not on their own local machine) to see their balances.
Similarly, cold-storage or an "air-gapped system" (such as the approach used with Armory, or other wallets which implement BIP 32) (both of which require HD - hierarchical deterministic wallets - in order to keep the online wallet and the offline wallet in-sync) are in some sense similar to SPV wallets - in that the private keys are kept on one (permanently offline) machine, while the (public) addresses are kept on another (online) machine (at the user's location in the case of Armory and other "cold storage" or "air gapped" solutions - or on a remote server in the case of SPV).
OK, so summarizing, this is the background:
  • online nodes need 3 things (DDoS protection, high bandwidth, 24/7), so they should preferably be run in datacenters
  • offline nodes are good for privacy (air-gapped / cold storage), and need little or no connectivity, so they should preferably be run in people's homes
I know the following are probably in some sense really old and obvious questions - but I want to ask them here again, because I do not feel certain that the community has gotten a fair chance to fully answer them, due to the notorious distortions in the recent debate about "max blocksize":
(1) Given that webservers are pretty much all in datacenters, shouldn't we also expect (and embrace) the inevitability that Bitcoin full-nodes will also pretty much all be in datacenters?
(2) Given that the only thing I need in order to verify receipt of funds is:
  • my private key
  • some access to an online machine which can verify the corresponding (public) address
...then shouldn't I be indifferent (neutral) as to whether I do this (the online part - just verifying the funds at an address) on a local machine in my home, versus on a remote machine in a datacenter?
Indeed, for security, I don't even want my private keys to be on an online machine anyways - I want to always use a "cold storage" or "air-gapped" approach as provided by Armory (and some other wallets which implement BIP 32), on an offline machine.
So this would seem to suggest a specialization of Bitcoin software, into the following different programs:
(1) online full-node software (for relaying blocks and transactions, and for checking the balances at addresses). This is the software which needs:
  • lots of bandwidth
  • DDoS protection
  • 24/7 availability
The above program should be running online in a remote datacenter.
(2) offline wallet software (for generating private keys, and signing transactions).
The above program should be running locally, in my home - possibly even offline, for greater security.
Note that a fundamental requirement for this architecture is HD - hierarchical deterministic wallets: an easy-to-implement feature (but one which Core/Blockstream has neglected including in their wallet).
This is needed because if the system is "split" between an online part and an offline part, then HD is needed in order generate identical sequences of private keys, public keys, and (public) addresses on both machines.
Summary:
From the point of view of:
  • online throughput (of full nodes)
  • online DDoS protection (of full nodes)
  • online 24/7 availability (of full nodes)
  • offline cold storage (of private keys)
We really want a two-part system, consisting of:
  • an online full-node, which could be in a remote datacenter (and which multiple users could probably share)
  • a (possibly permanently offline) local wallet (which is mine alone).
Since this kind of "split" architecture is actually the one which would best would satisfy all our needs (throughput, DDoS protection, 24/7 availability of the online part - and low resource usage, and total air-gapped / cold-storage security for the offline part) - then why aren't we simply accepting this, and designing our full-node and wallet software as two separate programs, each specialized for their respective tasks and environment?
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Hacking, Distributed/State of the Bitcoin Network: "In other words, the provisioned bandwidth of a typical full node is now 1.7X of what it was in 2016. The network overall is 70% faster compared to last year."

Hacking, Distributed/State of the Bitcoin Network: submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

12-23 08:22 - 'PSA: Bitcoin full nodes under attack by Altcoin Cash supporting bitcore nodes. Spam attack coincides with bitcore attack, will drain your bandwidth. Download banbitcorecash.sh to ban them.' (pruned.mooo.com) by /u/sumBTC removed from /r/Bitcoin within 43-53min

PSA: Bitcoin full nodes under attack by Altcoin Cash supporting bitcore nodes. Spam attack coincides with bitcore attack, will drain your bandwidth. Download banbitcorecash.sh to ban them.
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: sumBTC
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Full Node Testing (Bandwidth question) /r/Bitcoin

Full Node Testing (Bandwidth question) /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Bitseed 2.1 released - new open source web UI for Bitcoin full nodes with Tor and bandwidth controls

Bitseed 2.1 released - new open source web UI for Bitcoin full nodes with Tor and bandwidth controls submitted by BitseedOrg to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Running a full node for 2 weeks with no restrictions of bandwidth @ 10 Mbps. last count was 52 nodes connected. /r/Bitcoin

Running a full node for 2 weeks with no restrictions of bandwidth @ 10 Mbps. last count was 52 nodes connected. /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Thinking of running a full node. Is it ok to run it on a raspberry pi? Is it ok to prune old blocks? What is the average bandwidth consumption? /r/Bitcoin

Thinking of running a full node. Is it ok to run it on a raspberry pi? Is it ok to prune old blocks? What is the average bandwidth consumption? /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

If I have to limit my full-node bandwidth, what's the best thing to disable? /r/Bitcoin

If I have to limit my full-node bandwidth, what's the best thing to disable? /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Bitseed 2.1 released - new web UI for Bitcoin full nodes with Tor and bandwidth controls

Bitseed 2.1 released - new web UI for Bitcoin full nodes with Tor and bandwidth controls submitted by lightcoin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Guide: How to run a full node on Windows when you have monthly bandwidth limits /r/Bitcoin

Guide: How to run a full node on Windows when you have monthly bandwidth limits /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

My full node only transfers about 300MB per day. That's an average bandwidth of 29kbps. /r/Bitcoin

My full node only transfers about 300MB per day. That's an average bandwidth of 29kbps. /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

How to Run a Bitcoin Full Node on Your NAS - Simple ... Os benefícios de um Full Node de Bitcoin Setting Up A BitCoin Full Node Using Rokos Image On A ... What is a Bitcoin Node? - Step by Step Explanation - YouTube Bitcoin - Full Node/Update - YouTube

Running a Bitcoin full node comes with certain costs and can expose you to certain risks. This section will explain those costs and risks so you can decide whether you’re able to help the network. Special Cases. Miners, businesses, and privacy-conscious users rely on particular behavior from the full nodes they use, so they will often run their own full nodes and take special safety ... Contrary to some popular misconceptions, being an archival node is not necessary to being a full node. If a user's bandwidth is constrained then they can use -listen=0, if their disk space is constrained they can use pruning, all the while still being a fully-validating node that enforces bitcoin's consensus rules and contributing to bitcoin's overall security. Why should you run a full node ... Running a Bitcoin full node comes with certain costs and can expose you to certain risks. This section will explain those costs and risks so you can decide whether you’re able to help the network. Special Cases. Miners, businesses, and privacy-conscious users rely on particular behavior from the full nodes they use, so they will often run their own full nodes and take special safety ... Running a Bitcoin full node comes with certain costs and can expose you to certain risks. This section will explain those costs and risks so you can decide whether you’re able to help the network. Special Cases. Miners, businesses, and privacy-conscious users rely on particular behavior from the full nodes they use, so they will often run their own full nodes and take special safety ... There are various ways you can run a Bitcoin Cash full node whether it's in a cloud, on a local machine or by leveraging a small single-board computer.

[index] [24995] [35753] [34224] [8432] [23011] [49083] [36075] [26516] [29011] [34554]

How to Run a Bitcoin Full Node on Your NAS - Simple ...

I have been talking for a while about making a tutorial on how to set up a lightning node. It's still coming, but here I explain what I have been waiting for... ===== For More Information Click The Link To My Website http://www.fuzzthepiguy.tech/ =====... Talking about Sovereignty https://bitcoin.org/en/download https://bitcoin.org/en/full-node#what-is-a-full-node https://blockchain.info/charts/blocks-size htt... https://ajtrading.wordpress.com/2020/10/03/bitcoin-full-node-update/ What is A Bitcoin Node. Step by Step Explanation https://blockgeeks.com/ The bitcoin network consists of a network of nodes, which are just computers or serv...

#