XRP Ninja

There's been some problems with the validator ever since it crashed about a week ago. It doesn't crash any more since I added much more disk space. But it easily falls behind and needs to play catch up several hours after each restart. I learned this from state_accounting field in the output of "rippled server_info". I created a metric and a chart from it. This is what the chart looks for the last week. The " Full " mode state means it is fully synced and participating in consensus process. You can see it is now asymptotically approaching 100 now. The value means the percentage of uptime the validator stays in each mode. I figured out why the disk was out of space. It was because the validator fell behind. When that happens, online delete is disabled. See this code: https://github.com/ripple/rippled/blob/fc0d64f5eec4386db7146251ab1a7fe880bec17c/src/ripple/app/misc/SHAMapStoreImp.cpp#L751 I saw some "Not deleting" messages in the l

The above graph shows what happened. I did get an alert from GCE that disk usage was high. I have an alert policy which says alert me if disk usage is over 80% for more than 5 minutes. However, it was too late, so I didn't get up and thought maybe it could resolve on its own. But it didn't. And GCE didn't keep alerting me, which surprises me. Rippled logged these two lines before it died: 2018-Jan-10 11:33:27 Application:FTL Remaining free disk space is less than 512MB 2018-Jan-10 11:33:27 Application:FTL Application::onStop took 23ms So rippled killed itself: https://github.com/ripple/rippled/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=%22Remaining+free+disk+space+is+less+than+%22&type= Before that, log was flooded with the following messages for 5 hours: 2018-Jan-10 10:55:08 LoadMonitor:WRN Job: recvGetLedger run: 1390ms wait: 0ms 2018-Jan-10 10:55:32 LoadMonitor:WRN Job: recvGetLedger run: 1250ms wait: 0ms 2018-Jan-10 10:55:32 LoadMonitor:WRN Job: recvGetLed

Copied from the following link: https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/16362-rippled-0810-released/?do=findComment&comment=191441 mDuo13 wrote this. Kudos to him. To recap the Decentralization Strategy, here's a summary: Switch to using a validator list site (vl.ripple.com). This is where we are now. All rippled instances configured to use the site can automatically follow Ripple's updates to the recommended set of validators, in lockstep. In case you're curious, the validator list site publishes cryptographically signed recommendations of validators, so it's not easy to impersonate. And rippled caches the data it gets from the site, so the XRP Ledger won't go down even if vl.ripple.com is down for a while. (It might be tough to bring new rippled servers online while vl.ripple.com is down, but I think there are some protections against that, too.) Update the site and the existing validators to use validator tokens instead of master validator secret key

Information about this version can be found here  https://ripple.com/dev-blog/rippled-version-0-81-0/ . This happened at about 1:45pm local time. There were some behavior changes after the upgrade:

GCE provides various kinds of metrics from which one can create dashboard, alerting policies etc. However, there is no way to monitor performance of rippled unless we wrote something ourselves. Fortunately, GCE allows creating custom metrics. So as a starting point, I decided to create a metric for rippled build_version. This information is very useful. For example, you will be able to tell if the behavior of the server changes after version changes. However, I later learned that custom metric can't have "STRING" as its value type. So I created an uptime metric with build version as its label. It works just the same. Here is a screenshot of the chart created from this metric: Unfortunately, it seems I can't share this chart publicly, unlike charts created from built-in metrics which can be shared publicly.

I have been wondering about this lately. Then I found this article: http://eliasbizannes.com/blog/2017/10/why-bitcoin-or-another-deflationary-currency-will-lead-to-an-economic-revolution/ TL;DR: as long as investment has higher return then hoarding the deflationary currency, people will invest instead of hoarding. Similarly, if market maker can make more than hoarding XRP, market maker will make market instead of hoarding.

Maybe this is obvious all along to some people. Anyway, I just figured this out. So I thought maybe it's worth sharing. Previously I thought the bridging consists of two transactions, both on XRP ledger. One from fiat currency A IOU to XRP, the other from XRP to fiat currency B IOU. Then I saw this: https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/10981-xrapid-uses-crypto-exchanges-to-route-payments-in-real-time/ So Miguel Vias said in the pilot they used liquidity on bitstamp and bitso. However it's seems the trading volume of XRP/bitso.MXN since the beginning of 2017 is so low that it's virtually no liquidity there. See this: https://xrpcharts.ripple.com/#/markets/XRP/MXN:rG6FZ31hDHN1K5Dkbma3PSB5uVCuVVRzfn?interval=1d&range=1y&type=candlestick Then I realized, just like bitstamp, bitso has its own exchange and the liquidity there is much better. https://bitso.com/trade/market/xrp/mxn So now it's clear to me there is another way for XRP to bridge cross-border paym

An article about ILP posted on American Express's website. It could mean nothing. But I won't be surprised if AE turned out to be using ILP for real since there's already rumor about it. https://www.americanexpress.com/us/content/foreign-exchange/articles/international-payments-hyperledger-interledger/ everis (NTT Data) confirm their adoption of ILP as the Hyperledger Quilt Project http://insights.everis.co.uk/post/102eihg/everis-ntt-data-confirm-their-adoption-of-ilp-as-the-hyperledger-quilt-project These news prove that Ripple's collaboration with Hyperledger to produce the Java implementation of ILP (Hyperledger Quilt Project) is a very brilliant move. So what does that mean for XRP? If you are a long time XRP hodler, you probably have already known this. But if you don't: The more ledgers ILP connects, the more payment volume XRP will be able to bridge. See also  this .

https://ripple.com/insights/q3-2017-xrp-markets-report/ The release caused the price to shot up vertically. Although it fell back a little shortly after. The highlights of the report in my opinion are: 23 percent Q-o-Q volume increase More  xRapid partnerships to be announced in Q4

I have created ripple.txt for my validator, following this instruction: https://wiki.ripple.com/Ripple.txt . Here is the link to my ripple.txt https://xrp.ninja/ripple.txt Here is my validator: https://xrpcharts.ripple.com/#/validators/nHBTqw7vwjqrSMruoQNYmSXcrBmQHDquG7jgvrsQpurGaVELqdNx I am going to have ripple employee change the validated domain name from rippled.xrp.ninja to just xrp.ninja. The ripple.txt file can be validated here:  https://ripple.com/build/ripple-txt-validator/

https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/7229-a-question-about-validators/?do=findComment&comment=69555 There are several degrees of damage, that trusted validators can do (if they decide to give up their hard-earned trust), in increasing difficulty order: If a set of them, each of which only trust others in the same set, with less than 20% of them trust validators not in that set, decide to collude, they can create fork. If more than 20% of them decide to collude, they can prevent transactions from being validated. If more than 80% of them decide to collude, they can rewrite history as they wish.  However, as pointed out by mDuo13@, creating a fork is easy, but making people accept it is hard.

http://www.coindesk.com/ripples-xrp-giving-third-largest-cryptocurrency-second-look/ It's not news that coindesk is very biased against Ripple. But publishing such an article is crossing the line. This author either really didn't know Ripple well, or he just wanted to mislead people. It's a shame for coindesk to publish such a garbage. I will refute some of the claims made in that article. "Instead of using proof-of-work, it relied on a new, unproven consensus protocol." Calling ripple consensus protocol is unproven is a bold assertion. Yet it didn't even try to back it up. On the other hand, XRP ledger has been in use for years and there has been no reports that it doesn't work. And it has defended itself against Stellar's attack once. "This protocol requires users to extend trust to validating servers that produce this consensus." False. Users only need to trust gateway. Users never need to trust validator. Validators need to

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-30/understanding-cryptocurrency-boom-and-its-volatility It says: speculative booms eventually end and technologies mature into forms that solve real business problems in uniquely cheap and robust ways no other technology can match. That said technology exists today. It is Ripple/XRP.