[QUOTE=Uncwilly;551677]So, I have to do at least one PRP or PRP-DC on this machine. PRP-CF does not count toward that I guess. My PRP-CF-DC's are doing the VDFs.[/QUOTE]


Just changed server, you can have CERTs too.

The GPU72 proxy
 

The first CERT I received through the proxy said there was a mismatch in the downloaded hash. George redid the CERT the next day.

I turned off the use of the proxy in the PrimeNet configuration window. The next CERT I received was a successful verification. Is there really any reason to use this proxy anymore?

My TF work is done either on Colab or through MISFIT. The only downside I see is the loss of visibility of the GIMPS DC work on the GPU72 web site.

[QUOTE=Chuck;551759]I turned off the use of the proxy in the PrimeNet configuration window. The next CERT I received was a successful verification. Is there really any reason to use this proxy anymore?[/QUOTE]

Yeah... I've been collecting data, but haven't had time to drill down yet. The Proxy is definitely causing errors; it seems on the initial assignment, rather than on the return messaging.

Other than for P-1 work, the Proxy is little more than a way to collect stats on DC and LL work nowadays.

[QUOTE=Prime95;551612]Command line arguments are user_id, proof_file_name, chunk_size, bandwidth_limit

Default chunk size is 5 (MB)
Default bandwidth_limit is unlimited. I'm using 1 (Mbps)[/QUOTE]
uploader user_id proof_file_name[ chunk size[ bandwidth_limit]
in that order apparently.

There's no -h, -?, /?

How compressible are the proof files?

Maybe compressing them before uploading will help?

Interesting article: [URL]https://dev.to/biellls/compression-clearing-the-confusion-on-zip-gzip-zlib-and-deflate-15g1[/URL]

That got discussed around page #3 in this thread already. Unfortunately, compression would not help.

Corporate security settings are too strict for such a new version of Prime95 and the libgmp-10.dll.

Oh well.

Home machine has received, run, and turned in PRP-CF certs and has generated some for others.

I tried v30.1b1 on PRP CF and it generated a proof with no issues: [M]3344339[/M]

But when there is already a type 5 PRP CF test on the exponent and 1 extra factor is found, I think 1 test is enough to verify the cofactor right? The residue matched the previous tests, so no proof validation is needed.

Hey George. More data...

So, my Winblows machine has done two CERT runs in the last day. [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=97265881&full=1"]97265881[/URL] matched, while [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=97282747&full=1"]97282747[/URL] didn't (your run confirmed the original PRP run was good).

Neither of these went through the Proxy. Direct comms with Primenet.

Is it possible this new code path is exercising different part(s) of my kit, and I might need to service it? I /think/its history with DC'ing has been flawless.

Current status of PRP proof / cert verification rollout
 

It's progressing very well.
Producing prp proofs: prime95/mprime v30.1, gpuowl v6.11-312? or later
As far as I know these are the only applications which have implemented and demonstrated support.

PrimeNet API is sending Cert work to and retrieving results from suitable prime95/mpprime instances
Gpuowl's primenet.py can be used to upload proof files on systems with python installed.
There's also a manual uploader program provided by Prime95 which can be used with gpuowl proof files.
(That does not require any compiler or interpreter present on the Windows system.)

The PrimeNet server handles quite a few aspects of proof and verification. The essential function of getting verifications done are there.
Areas at mersenne.org that may benefit from updating eventually:
[URL]https://www.mersenne.org/report_recent_cleared/[/URL] does not list certs
[URL]https://www.mersenne.org/assignments/[/URL] does not have an exclude certs choice
[URL]https://www.mersenne.org/primenet/[/URL] has no info on certs, no distinction between LL & PRP
[URL]https://www.mersenne.org/account/?details=1[/URL] has no info on certs performed
[URL]https://www.mersenne.org/report_top_500/[/URL] has no cert info
[URL]https://www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_custom/?type=0[/URL] has no stats type for certs
[URL]https://www.mersenne.org/report_top_teams/[/URL] has no cert info
[URL]https://www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_custom/?type=10000[/URL] has no stats type for certs
There's no detailed report for certs analogous to [URL]https://www.mersenne.org/report_prp/[/URL]
Cert history entries don't indicate a result [URL]https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=97513771&full=1[/URL] for example, Architects Cubed's Cert did not match, Woltman's did match, but you can't tell from the page.
There is currently no manual CERT assignment, and that may be by design. [URL]https://www.mersenne.org/manual_assignment/[/URL]

It's unclear how mersenne.ca will handle proof-based verifications.
[URL]https://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/97018073[/URL] does not indicate any cert, or prp residue near top of page, although mersenne.org shows it with a cert and prp residue from 7/22 and 7/23 respectively.

I guess that this is a 'proof' and not a cert....
well it take me about a week.