Daniel Kraft

Indeed, that sounds like a plausible explanation. For the future, is there any point in not just always creating a segwit block, though? Especially with the Bitcoin change I mentioned...

> I`m not aware about dns-seeder for namecoin, it would be best option to run one. We do have multiple seeds for mainnet, and they seem to be working (just...

> @domob1812 you probably need point some peers that seeder can start with, we also need add it (seeder) to code. Not sure what you mean - the seeders (for...

For those who come here in hopes of getting up a testnet node, I've also set up one now that can be used as `addnode`: 51.75.22.122 We really should set...

FYI, the just released [version 0.18.0](https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin-core/releases/tag/nc0.18.0) schedules a softfork (BIP16, CSV and segwit, see #239). On testnet, this will activate at block height 232,000, which is rather "soonish" (but it...

Interesting, my own testnet node as well. Perhaps some nodes have not updated for segwit and are thus producing an invalid (longer) chain? I've not looked into that, though, so...

Sounds good to me, although especially with the value checker (which in your post seems to be specific to .bit) we should be careful to have it as separated from...

Isn't this something for upstream Bitcoin?

Ah yes indeed, that's a good point. :) Makes sense for us to just add a simple test then I guess. I can take care of that with next upstream...

Top mining pools and contact information for them: https://forum.namecoin.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&p=17489 I'll try to get in touch with everyone and inquire if they are willing to support such a fork (I don't...