 |
 |
[rc5]Inconsistencies between keyspace and keys?
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Norman OK USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
As of tonight, <a href="http://stats.distributed.net/rc5-64/" target="_blank">rc5 stats</a> is reporting 54,084,429,224 blocks tested, 78.703% of the total keyspace.
As of now, Bondi is crunching packet 45793FED:30000000:6*2^28. Assuming that this is a hexadecimal number and the key number(s) (16 digits in base 16 is equivalent to 64 digits in base 2), this means that Bondi is crunching blocks number 18,649,186,003 to 18,649,186,008 instead of 54 billion plus as would be suggested by the current progress.
Does this mean that rc5 is current filling in gaps in the keyspace, or are they counting all blocks tested instead of unique blocks tested (two people crunching the same keys are counted twice in the overall total)? If the later is the case, then we are only 27.1% complete in the keyspace.
Block number 54,084,429,224 corresponds to key C97AEE5A:80000000. Has anyone seen a key in this range? This is what you're looking for:
.....10%.....20%.....30%.....40%.....50%.....60%.. ...70%.....80%.....90%....100
[May 28 04:49:46 UTC] RC5: Completed 45793FED:30000000 (6.00 stats units)
0.00:19:58.14 - [1,344,255 keys/s]
[May 28 04:49:46 UTC] RC5: Loaded 45726F19:50000000:8*2^28
[May 28 04:49:46 UTC] RC5: Summary: 3 packets (14.00 stats units)
0.00:43:15.23 - [1,289,578 keys/s]
[May 28 04:49:46 UTC] RC5: 3 packets (17.00 stats units) remain in
buff-in.rc5
Projected ideal time to completion: 0.00:56:23.00
[May 28 04:49:46 UTC] RC5: 1 packet (6.00 stats units) is in buff-out.rc5
Then again, given that the completed block succeeds the currently loaded block, maybe they are just filling in the gaps.
Ideas?
|
|
If you put a bullseye on yourself, don't be surprised when someone takes a shot at you.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Administrator  Join Date: May 2000
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
I suspect the keyspace is not issued sequentially, but that blocks are issued semi-randomly from it. RSA Labs appears to have guessed the issue method and buried the key very late in the sequence, but that could just be chance.
Also, those who crunch offline may presently crunch randoms. If no one else has crunched those blocks, they will count, and should not get passed out later on. This would also tend to give you blocks that jump around the keyspace, though to a lesser extent.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
I believe that RC5 packets are issued randomly.
It would be funny if we went through the entire keyspace and no one found an answer. It would mean there's been a mistake somehwere! If a single PC out of the millions (?) participating had a brain fart while it was crunching the all-important Message, it woulda reported "negative" and goen over it. Unforunate - if that's the case  I'm doing Folding@Home. If a mistake is made there, someone might get cancer someday from an improper product made with data from F@H.
|
|
Actual conversation between UCLA and Stanford during a login on early Internet - U: I'm going to type an L! Did you get an L? S: I got one-one-four. L! U:Did you get the O? S: One-one-seven. U: <types G> S: The computer just crashed.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Norman OK USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Okay, they are back in numeric sequence again, but it still 46868C73E0000000, not C9BA000000000000 or so.
I don't think the keys are actually being sent out randomly, but they do periodically resend keys that have not returned. For example, key 123456789ABCDEF0 was sent to Bob. Bob didn't return the result, so three weeks later it's sent to Linda. Linda returns the result, then Bob does minutes later. Both are given credit for it (correctly), but the overall tally incorrectly counts two keys completed, not one.
Because of this, rc5 stats will have results equal to 100% of the keyspace, but only have tested about 35% of the keys. CDhostage may be right, but not for the reason he thinks. The brainfart is on the part of the statkeepers at rc5.
|
|
If you put a bullseye on yourself, don't be surprised when someone takes a shot at you.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
I hope that 35% figure is just speculation on your part. It will annoy people if RC5 puts up two graphs : this one is the number of results recieved vs. total number of keys
This is the number of UNIQUE reults recieved vs. total number of keys.
That will be annoying. I hope it's more like 75% instead.
|
|
Actual conversation between UCLA and Stanford during a login on early Internet - U: I'm going to type an L! Did you get an L? S: I got one-one-four. L! U:Did you get the O? S: One-one-seven. U: <types G> S: The computer just crashed.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Administrator Join Date: May 2000
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
Duplicate results are credited only once, to the first client to submit them. That includes results from randoms.
From the dnetc FAQ:
<a href="http://n0cgi.distributed.net/faq/index.cgi?file=207" target="_blank">I'm missing work units!</a>
... and ...
<a href="http://n0cgi.distributed.net/faq/index.cgi?file=71" target="_blank">Do random blocks show up in stats?</a>
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
