[QUOTE=xx005fs;528334]The site seems to be down again.[/QUOTE]
It's only the front page, again.

[QUOTE=xx005fs;528334]The site seems to be down again.[/QUOTE]Thanks, should be happier now.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;528342]Thanks, should be happier now.[/QUOTE]

...the site now:
:bow wave::banana:
Sorry, couldn't resist.

[QUOTE=nomead;525468]I took some chunks of exponents through mfaktc with bit levels 2 to 64 (since it's not significantly slower than 55 to 64) and Stages=0 to catch 'em all.[/QUOTE]@nomead: It looks from my data that you have probably worked through the entire range of 2800M < 3000M to 2[sup]64[/sup], not stopping after a factor found -- can you confirm (or refute) this, please?

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;528454]@nomead: It looks from my data that you have probably worked through the entire range of 2800M < 3000M to 2[sup]64[/sup], not stopping after a factor found -- can you confirm (or refute) this, please?[/QUOTE]

I can confirm that and a bit more now, actually. That was the situation a month ago (Thought I sent an e-mail about it back then?) but the situation is now, everything is done from M2800000051 to M3229999991, from 2^2 to 2^64, not stopping after any factor found, so that should find everything there. The project is actually on hold now, doing the ordinary factoring from 67 to 68 bits on reserved exponents, but will continue after that's done.

[QUOTE=nomead;528456]I can confirm that and a bit more now, actually.
... everything is done from M2800000051 to M3229999991, from 2^2 to 2^64[/QUOTE]Thanks. I had your effort recorded from 2800M-2999M but not the 3000M-3229M range. I have updated my data now.

Someone seems to be poaching / working off the books at 1370M. [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/1370666131"]Example.[/URL] There's some minor duplication of effort, but still, why bother?

[QUOTE=nomead;529593]Someone seems to be poaching / working off the books at 1370M. [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/1370666131"]Example.[/URL] There's some minor duplication of effort, but still, why bother?[/QUOTE]

I didn't think this was possible with James' current setup. Anything pulled would be marked and not available to another person to run until they were submitted back or had timed out.

With a bit of programming skill, a person could generate their own lists and [I]worktodo[/I] files. I don't see any other way to work off-the-grid, so to speak. Again, why bother?

[QUOTE=storm5510;529621]I didn't think this was possible[/QUOTE]It could happen if either the user generated their own assignment list, or if they previously had assignments but the expired after 10 days and were reassigned to someone else, then the original person reported results after the assignment had expired.

As of 2020-Jan-01, all result lines for TF >1G will need to include the "UID: [user]/[comp]" section at the beginning.
Please configure your mfakt[i]X[/i].ini to set "V5UserID" and "ComputerID".

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;530279]As of 2020-Jan-01, all result lines for TF >1G will need to include the "UID: [user]/[comp]" section at the beginning.
Please configure your mfakt[I]X[/I].ini to set "V5UserID" and "ComputerID".[/QUOTE]

This is interesting. Hopefully, this will allow participants in your project to go back and look at what they have ran. I will assume gigahertz-days will be part of this? Either way, it would be nice if [I]PrimeNet[/I] would follow suit and not dump other things into the "Manual Testing" category. Specifically, anything ran with [I]mfaktc [/I]and its relatives[I].[/I]