Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
    Tim van de Vathorst
    @Timvdv
    This is probably more of an parity issue.. On startup it tells me the keys are in /root/.local/share/io.parity.ethereum/keys/Ropsten but that folder does not exist
    Loredana Cirstea
    @loredanacirstea
    Yes, this is a Parity setup issue. The keys should have been in io.parity.ethereum/keys/ - wherever that is located on your system (location should be documented in the Parity docs).
    André Vitor de Lima Matos
    @andrevmatos
    @Timvdv on the server, your key doesn't need to be in the eth node (e.g. parity). If you create one through parity's interface, for example, it'll be in the folder you listed, but if you didn't, the eth node will still launch and work. In the µRaiden server side, it doesn't care from where does your key come from, as far as it can access it. If it's on the parity's default path, you can point it directly there, with --private-key, or copy if from there to another path. The key is read directly, and the eth node is used only to talk with the network. So, you can launch parity without a key, and generate one with Metamask and put it directly in µRaiden server, and it'll work.
    Tim van de Vathorst
    @Timvdv
    @andrevmatos Ahh okay! Did not know that. Got it working by creating an account using the Parity UI which created the keys for me. I'll start creating my microraiden dapp next week :+1:
    Deep Chenna
    @deepchenna
    Hi, I'm trying to run the echo_server.py example code. I'm stuck with following issue. Can some one help with root cause for this issue
    Traceback (most recent call last):
    File "/Users/Deep/Documents/OneDrive/Documents/BlockChain/Paid API/WD/proxy-server.py", line 102, in <module>
    main()
    File "/Users/Deep/anaconda/envs/raiden/lib/python3.5/site-packages/click/core.py", line 722, in call
    return self.main(args, kwargs)
    File "/Users/Deep/anaconda/envs/raiden/lib/python3.5/site-packages/click/core.py", line 697, in main
    rv = self.invoke(ctx)
    File "/Users/Deep/anaconda/envs/raiden/lib/python3.5/site-packages/click/core.py", line 895, in invoke
    return ctx.invoke(self.callback,
    ctx.params)
    File "/Users/Deep/anaconda/envs/raiden/lib/python3.5/site-packages/click/core.py", line 535, in invoke
    return callback(
    args, **kwargs)
    File "/Users/Deep/Documents/OneDrive/Documents/BlockChain/Paid API/WD/proxy-server.py", line 49, in main
    run(private_key)
    File "/Users/Deep/Documents/OneDrive/Documents/BlockChain/Paid API/WD/proxy-server.py", line 74, in run
    web3
    File "/Users/Deep/anaconda/envs/raiden/lib/python3.5/site-packages/microraiden/make_helpers.py", line 58, in make_channel_manager
    token_address = channel_manager_contract.call().token()
    File "/Users/Deep/anaconda/envs/raiden/lib/python3.5/site-packages/web3/contract.py", line 794, in call_contract_function
    output_data = decode_abi(output_types, return_data)
    File "/Users/Deep/anaconda/envs/raiden/lib/python3.5/site-packages/eth_abi/abi.py", line 58, in decode_abi
    raise TypeError("The data value must be of bytes type. Got {0}".format(type(data)))
    TypeError: The data value must be of bytes type. Got <class 'str'>
    Loredana Cirstea
    @loredanacirstea
    @deepchenna I think you are using web3.py v.3.* instead of web3==v4.0.0-beta.4 . You should use our requirements files to install the pip packages. Also, note that it's better to you run uRaiden in a virtual environment.
    Deep Chenna
    @deepchenna
    @loredanacirstea Thankyou for the reply.. I've checked the web3 version, i'm having v4.0.0b4. In fact i followed the steps in quickstart portion in readme file.
    Loredana Cirstea
    @loredanacirstea
    @deepchenna , what version of eth-abi do you have if you do a pip freeze? Try with eth-abi==0.5.0
    Deep Chenna
    @deepchenna
    @loredanacirstea Thank you.. it was 1.0.0.. issue got resolved after changing to 0.5.0
    Loredana Cirstea
    @loredanacirstea
    There is a new 0.2.5 micrroraiden pypi release with a version fix as for this morning.
    Martin Opdenacker
    @MartinOpde
    Hello I am trying to launch examples from the microraiden github repository, the server is starting fine but i get "Channel manager ETH balance is below limit" with no webUI. How can I get the default webUI running?
    Loredana Cirstea
    @loredanacirstea
    @MartinOpde , you provided an account private key when you started the proxy. It means that you don't have enough ETH on it - you need at least 10**8 WEI . See the webui-related instructions from https://github.com/raiden-network/microraiden#quick-start
    Martin Opdenacker
    @MartinOpde
    @loredanacirstea Thx it's ok now
    Tim van de Vathorst
    @Timvdv

    I have another question, might be pretty simple, but I can't find it in the docs.

    I now have 2 accounts that opened a channel. Now I want to send an offchain transaction from account 1 to account 2. How do I do this (using the front-end, not the Python interface).

    Loredana Cirstea
    @loredanacirstea
    @Timvdv , to make sure we are on the same page: when you want to send an off-chain transaction between two accounts, there are some requirements:
    1. a channel needs to exist between the accounts
    2. the account in the receiver role needs to run the uRaiden Python proxy server and it has to be online, otherwise it cannot receive offchain payments.
      Now, for the sender to use the web interface, see the link to the Readme quick start from above regarding the webui. You can run the proxy examples shown here: http://microraiden.readthedocs.io/en/docs-develop/applications/pyserver/usage.html (wikipaydia, demo_proxy) to see the paywall web interface.
    Tim van de Vathorst
    @Timvdv

    Thanks for the quick response, the proxy is up and running. I connected 2 accounts via the uraiden openChannel function and added some balance to open the channel. the channel block is the same for both accounts. This means they're in the same channel right?

    I don't really understand the sender/receiver part. A sender can also be a receiver right? I created a image to clear things up.

    uraiden

    Mhh, Thats not really readable, try this link: http://cloud.tvdv.me/2X0C1E3t280U/o
    Loredana Cirstea
    @loredanacirstea
    @Timvdv the channel is unidirectional. You can only send tokens from the sender (e.g. A) to a receiver (e.g.) B, so : A -> B. Raiden Network has bidirectional channels and you can send A <-> B (even if you don't have a channel opened directly between A and B).
    So with uRaiden, the only way you could send A<->B is to have two channels. But this means that both A and B have to run the uRaiden Python proxy.
    Note that uRaiden is efficient when you need to do frequent payments, ideally unidirectional (think users paying for a service that they use frequently or apps using a paid API)
    Tim van de Vathorst
    @Timvdv
    Aha, okay makes sense! Thanks for the explanation. I'm creating an IOT Dashboard, from here you can add different devices. a smart lightbulb for example. I think this is the correct use case for uraiden, I want to open a channel once, and then send the commands on/off regularly. I created a new diagram. This should work right? http://cloud.tvdv.me/3h212X3U0i1B
    I have one more question, if we use the example in my diagram. How can the user find the IOT device and open the initial channel
    Loredana Cirstea
    @loredanacirstea
    @Timvdv , the new diagram is correct with a single nitpicky mention -> the Parity Server should be uRaiden proxy + Ethereum chain. For the users to find an IoT device, you have to store the available IoT device addresses - this is a Dapp related issue, not a uRaiden one, if I understand the question correctly.
    Tim van de Vathorst
    @Timvdv
    Thanks @loredanacirstea !
    Loredana Cirstea
    @loredanacirstea
    @Timvdv , you are welcome! Feel free to keep us posted with your project.
    another1001bit
    @another1001bit_twitter
    i asked in reddit about EIP 712
    The whole is here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/84u6ip/ethereum_developer_community_please_help_raiden/ and there is 2 comments according them EIP712 is not important:

    " But just merging an EIP doesn't do anything. This EIP doesn't require a hard fork. It just proposes a convention.

    You have to convince client developers to implement the proposed convention.

    +
    "Actually those extremely well funded projects could develop from scratch their own clients. There’s lots of space for improvement in the client space. An elegant way to say the clients we have today barely work."
    Some other guys in reddit raiden told us that basicly Microraiden is ready and it await only EIP 712. Now it looks like EIP 712 is not needed, but it is needed some changes in client. Who is correct?
    another1001bit
    @another1001bit_twitter
    Does those 2 comments about client are make any sense?

    "conclusion

    microraiden - docs and waiting for EIP 712" from https://www.reddit.com/r/raidennetwork/comments/81x9xl/git_weekly_update_7/

    another1001bit
    @another1001bit_twitter
    can someone make clear ,are we need eip712 or we need changes in client?
    André Vitor de Lima Matos
    @andrevmatos
    @another1001bit_twitter eip712 is a standard/protocol for client implementation. It'll allow the client to sign the data he's seeing, instead of an opaque hash. The later doesn't actually need any changes for the client, and was a preliminary implementation in µRaiden. But we can't ask for "faith" from the user when signing a micropayment, that's why EIP712 is needed (also why you see the amount of ETH you are asked to transfer in Metamask, instead of a dialog asking to sign some big hex string)
    it's not strictly required for µraiden (it's already released, and on Mainnet), but essential for a trustless µpayment system
    another1001bit
    @another1001bit_twitter
    Oh I see, thank you
    Lefteris Karapetsas
    @LefterisJP
    @another1001bit_twitter As Andre said it's required for a secure and trustless version of microraiden. You can still use microraiden today -- just the deployed version does not have the usability guarantees we want until EIP712 is cleared and all the security issues are addressed.
    another1001bit
    @another1001bit_twitter
    Lefteris thank you very much for clarification . Hope that this small topic on reddit will speedup proces about eip 712 ;) looks like it is good thing, because this dialog windows can be confusing ofcourse
    Thanks a lot /\
    Nick Savers
    @nicksavers
    @LefterisJP you could bring up EIP-712 in the upcoming AllDevsCall to ask for client developers to implement this feature.
    Nick Savers
    @nicksavers
    You can add it here ethereum/pm#33
    Lefteris Karapetsas
    @LefterisJP
    I could. Not all types of clients would need to implement this. Clients where approval is required before signing would need to do it. E.g. metamask.
    Most important would be to get feedback by people in order to clear out the last few issues that have surfaced in the EIP.
    Lefteris Karapetsas
    @LefterisJP
    done. Thanks for the suggestion nick
    Mikers
    @mseiler1_twitter
    is micro raiden only for erc20 or does it support ether? just curious
    i run a token mining pool and i'm curious to use microraiden for token payouts instead of sending them on chain, we've been starting to develop our own protocol, but if this one is complete and more secure...
    Mikers
    @mseiler1_twitter
    Lefteris Karapetsas
    @LefterisJP
    only ERC20
    But Ether can very easily be ERC20-tokenized.