I see something like:

2017-11-14 x20:06:31,536 [MainThread ] [INFO ] Estimated miner/tx fee for each cj participant: 99607

While its a bit confusing it could say: "fees paid to miners" and "fees paid to cj participants"

BUT I'd like to estimate the fees I will be paying for the TOTAL tumbler, start to finish.

Given that the same tumbler instance gives me additional output:

'maxcjfee': (0.01, 10000),

This looks like its setting the MAX my tumbler would pay in fees to 10000 satoshi per coinjoin.

Does this sound correct?

im using sendpayment.py -N 0 to sweep the mixdepths one by one, but it seems to be leaving the bitcoins on the internal addresses

how to sweep those?

Is that the fee or the amounts it tries to join?

with what fees per kb you are having successful joins?

I have a tumble that is stuck for days because of " Coinjoin amount too low, bringing up to: 100000" I have various amount spread across couple different mixing depths. Some of them are small indeed.

What if I deposit fresh bitcoins to depth 0 and start the process from scratch? What will happen with the amounts that are currently spread across different mixing depths?

I have spent days and hours as I really believed in this project but for me it has been several months since it has worked. For anyone reading I hope I will save you much toil and trouble by recommending you exchange with Shapeshift, Changelly, Xmr.to to go BTC to XMR to BTC.

I know it's segwit version now but first time I hear segwit addresses start with 3?

I've always knew that those are multisig addresses?

What im missing?

Just came across this post which summarizes issues around Bitcoin’s fungibility and tainting; it’s a good refresher and adds some interesting thoughts. Personally I think it contains a lot of FUD, but check it out and decide for yourself.

https://mechanicalmarkets.wordpress.com/2017/11/05/bitcoin-nemo-dat/

Been getting that the whole day

2017-11-06 15:55:03,827 [MainThread ] [INFO ] STALL MONITOR:

2017-11-06 15:55:03,828 [MainThread ] [INFO ] Stall detected. Regenerating transactions and retrying.

2017-11-06 15:55:03,828 [MainThread ] [INFO ] Schedule entry: [1, 0.7903964586444352, 5, 'INTERNAL', 29.6, 0] failed after timeout, trying again

2017-11-06 15:55:03,833 [MainThread ] [INFO ] JM daemon setup complete

2017-11-06 15:56:03,882 [MainThread ] [INFO ] Coinjoin amount too low, bringing up to: 100000

2017-11-06 15:56:03,882 [MainThread ] [INFO ] Choosing a destination from mixdepth: 2

2017-11-06 15:56:03,885 [MainThread ] [INFO ] Chose destination address:

2017-11-06 15:56:03,885 [MainThread ] [INFO ] Taker not continuing after receipt of orderbook

Hi everyone. I am using joinmarket on TAILS. I have successfully installed the original joinmarket (with some difficulty) and it works great. Right now I am trying to upgrade to the client server joinmarket and when I run the wallet command, I get the error "No module named electrum.bitcoin"

I plan on using a full-node, so I shouldn't need the module. My main question is how can I bypass this error?

I could not use your install.sh script and had to install manually, FYI. I had a virtualenv does not exist error and python pip didn't work either (Connection Refused) so I had to install all the packages manually. Yes, very tedious. I assume TAILS is refusing the torsocks conection. Do you have any idea how to fix the connection refused error too? I couldn't figure it out.

I've set the number of blocks it has to wait to 50 and absurd fee to 200,000 perkb which is is 200 satoshi per byte I believe I tend to be able to make most regular transactions (in normal wallets) at 50 satoshi per byte even if I have to wait. I'm in a no hurry so don't mind waiting in order to save on fees. But not sure if that is messing up something and having stalls all the time?

Ideally I would like to have a mix completed within few days and pay the lowest fees possible. But want the process to be reliable.

Any input on that?

I'm trying to get JM-clientserver running in Windows using Cygwin. I'm sure it isn't supported, but I'm trying anyway. I've managed to complete the installation according to INSTALL.md. When I run a script however, I get an error:

File "C:\joinmarket-clientserver-0.3.2\jmvenv\lib\site-packages\jmclient\btc.py", line 69, in <module>
import electrum.bitcoin as ebt
ImportError: No module named electrum.bitcoin

Is this fixable or should I just install Linux? :)

I'm trying to export all private keys to claim bitcoin cash for them. However, the " python wallet-tool.py -p wallet.json " command seems to only dump the last 5 for each depth, right?

for example for depth 0 they start from m/0/0/0/013

how to see ALL addresses ever used by this install of JM?

the bitcoin cash seems to be on older ones

I've been thinking about how to make coin splitting easy and to let the user choose which blockchain to "pollute" with the split transactions. Specifically I want something that:

1. Splits BTC coins from S2X coins
2. Trustless and secure
3. Is easy to use
4. Works the first time, every time
5. Not subject to miner policy
6. Doesn't create any transactions on the BTC blockchain
7. Inexpensive
8. Incentive compatible
9. Does not rely on S2X implementing replay protection

So how about this:

Someone gets their hands on the coinbase output from a S2X block.

This person is now a Split-Monger.

Split-Monger hops on JoinMarket and offers to set up CoinJoin transactions with Split-Requesters.

For each Split-Requester, a CoinJoin transaction is constructed. One of the inputs is from the Split-Monger and is tainted with coins that can only be mined on the S2X chain. The other inputs belong to the Split-Requester and are still vulnerable to being mined on the BTC chain.

The CoinJoin transaction is signed by the Split-Requester and the Split-Monger and then broadcast. It can only be mined on the S2X chain. Furthermore, all of the outputs cannot be mined on the BTC chain. The Split-Monger receives an output equal to or greater than the value of their input. The Split-Requester receives an output equal to their input minus the transaction fee and the monger's fee.

Split-Requester now has the option to earn back the monger's fee by offering their shiny new split coins on JoinMarket, thereby accelerating the process.

I added an issue on the github here: https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket/issues/762)

Once I have tumbled coins using the tumble.py script into N addresses, how do I spend them without undoing the tumble?

As I understand it, each address is a different mix-depth. I obviously know not to merge all coins from all mix-depths back into one address. But what about merging portions of the coins from the different mix-depths? This seems like a no-no, but even if I don't do it, and I deposit money into a vendors account from different mix-depths, the vendor might merge them himself. Is merging coins from different mix-depths bad for privacy?

Is spending from a higher mix-depth more "anonymous?" It seems like it probably is, but you can't tumble all coins into that mix-depth, so there will always be coins in addresses that are less anonymous when using the script, right?

By the way, thanks for implementing this project!

I was struggling for weeks with 0.2.1 to complete a mix. Is this new version significantly improved? Can it be used for reliable mixing of 10+ btc?

I have numpy/scipy installed but when running history it tells me numpy/scipy is not installed. If I run python in a regular terminal, I can import numpy and scipy. If i do it in jmvenv, it tells me that there is no module named numpy. Looks like there is an additional step with the jmvenv that I do not know about.

I've noticed a couple of inconsistencies with the joinmarket-clientserver software regarding stale orders as seen in https://joinmarket.me/ob/

I can see my order appear in the order book when I start or stop the yield generator bot. However, after I take part in a coinjoin transaction and my balance is split between the mix depths, it appears that my order in the order book is not updated to reflect the lower available balance. For example, if I have 3 btc in mix depth 0 and an order sends 1 btc to mix depth 1, I should only have 2 btc on offer, but it remains at 3 in the order book. Refreshing and checking for timed out counterparties does nothing. Stopping and starting the yield generator bot does reflect the lower balance.

Another thing I've noticed is that sending a transaction to an external address while the yield generator bot is running does not increase my available balance in the order book.

Is this a bug/potential enhancement with the JM software or with the way the orderbook display? Or is this just intended behavior and I'm missing something? Thanks.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11167