Could this be somehow coupled to the servers running a pool, like if you are running a pool, you will need to run a masternode instance... etc..
This would bring a totally new coin concept to the market?
Darkcoin network has 7 major pool(including p2pool).
http://drk.poolhash.org/poolhash.htmlWhat about if this would be a p2pool requisite, this would increase the p2pool hosters if the rewards are greater?
And so distribute the hashrare and create local p2pool nodes close to users.
As far as I understand this,
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6039340#msg6039340- any node could be master node(Won election, and hold 1000DRK)
- election code will be in main client
So I propose the following solution, each block the last master node will receive 10% of the mining reward (in addition to the reward given to the miner). So for example, if the mining reward was 19DRK the last master node will automatically receive 1.9DRK.
At the present moment we have a chicken and egg problem. We need master nodes to support darksend and we don't want to go live with 1 or 2 master nodes. To solve this we will implement the election code into the main client, along with the payments to master nodes while DarkSend is still beta.
As reward will be given automatically, change of p2pool's subsidy function will be needed.
p2pool-drk has 32 nodes.
I don't think a p2pool requisite is viable option.
Run normal client holding 1000 DRk VS Run normal client plus p2pool(require a lot of setup)
Yeah, there are several draw backs now that I think of it, Like hackers know exactly where to hit etc..
Could we decouple running the master node and the wallet, like in with p2pools, you can define remote wallet which is not running on the same server etc.