Update DGB v9.26.3 nodee fail to pass the correct difficulty for MiningCore mining pool to calculate

[FullyElectric]

all miners share submunition gets rejected .. however DGB node v8.26.x and v8.22.x both works, not rejection however it seems i am mining on a split chain .. this issue started 2 days ago, and i had to install the latest v9.26.3 however now i am getting rejections with the latest version .. how to fix any one of the above issues would be great,
Thanks.

error example
[2026-07-02 15:01:04.4270] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMO998TF4DK] Share rejected: low difficulty share (2.8062642962580604E-10) [NerdQAxe++/BM1370/V1.0.37.2-LTS]
[2026-07-02 15:01:20.1713] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMO998TF4DK] Share rejected: low difficulty share (3.324377898368114E-10) [NerdQAxe++/BM1370/V1.0.37.2-LTS]
[2026-07-02 15:01:59.7546] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMO998TF4DK] Share rejected: low difficulty share (2.683682843127444E-10) [NerdQAxe++/BM1370/V1.0.37.2-LTS]

[JaredTate]

You most likely have been running an old v7 node. 95% of the chain was on the correct main chain v8 nodes. The issue you are experiencing is likely due to the version mask & ASICboost on some closed-source SHA-256 miners. This is how we fixed it on DigiHash:

DigiByte v9.26.x SHA256 ASICBoost Fix

What Happens

After upgrading a DigiByte SHA256 pool from v8.26.2 to v9.26.x, some miners may connect to the pool but stop sending shares.

This can happen with miners or firmware that use ASICBoost / version rolling.

The miner may look connected, but the pool gets no useful work from it.

Why It Happens

DigiByte v9.26.x adds a new required version bit for DigiDollar.

That bit is:

0x00800000

The old SHA256 ASICBoost mask was:

1fffe000

That old mask lets miners change the new DigiDollar bit.

That is the problem.

The pool must not let miners change that bit. If a miner changes or clears it, the pool checks the share using the wrong block version. Then good miner work can look bad to the pool.

The Fix

Change the SHA256 ASICBoost version mask from:

"version_mask": "1fffe000"

to:

"version_mask": "1f7fe000"

This new mask still allows ASICBoost / version rolling, but it protects the DigiDollar bit so miners cannot change it.

DigiHash V2 File

On DigiHash V2, edit this file:

/home/digihash/digihashv2/coins/digibyte.sha256.json

The important SHA256 settings should look like this:

{
  "algorithm": "sha256d",
  "version-rolling": true,
  "allowAsicboost": true,
  "version_mask": "1f7fe000"
}

Do not change the algorithm name. It must stay:

sha256d

Restart The Pool

After changing the config, restart the pool.

For DigiHash V2:

sudo pm2 restart DigiHashv2

You do not need to change the DigiByte data directory.

You do not need to change the SHA256 digibyted config.

Miner Compatibility Note

The old mask had 16 rollable bits.

The new safe mask has 15 rollable bits.

If the pool tells miners:

version-rolling.min-bit-count: 16

some strict firmware may refuse to mine because only 15 safe bits are available.

For strict miners, the pool should advertise 15 bits, or not require a 16 bit minimum.

Short Version

For DigiByte v9.26.x SHA256 mining pools:

Use version_mask: 1f7fe000
Do not use version_mask: 1fffe000

This keeps ASICBoost working and stops miners from changing the new DigiDollar version bit.

[FullyElectric]

checking my logs i do see the bad version info you stated .. i was running 8.22.2 when i went to 9.26.3 and i built a totally new node and point my pool to that new DGB node, doing upgrades this way allows me to just re-point to the previous node quickly if any issues, let me add that new version number and see if that sorts this on v9.26.3 ..Thank you.

$ grep version-rolling dgb-sha256-1.log

[2026-07-02 14:58:04.6112] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMO998TF4DK] Using version-rolling mask 1fffe000
[2026-07-02 14:58:29.0668] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMO998TF4EB] Using version-rolling mask 1fffe000
[2026-07-02 15:00:11.0328] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMO998TF4EK] Using version-rolling mask 1fffe000
[2026-07-02 15:27:07.9674] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMO9M60MQUC] Using version-rolling mask 1fffe000
[2026-07-02 15:27:20.9766] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMO9M60MQUD] Using version-rolling mask 1fffe000
[2026-07-02 15:27:32.2035] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMO9M60MQUF] Using version-rolling mask 1fffe000

[FullyElectric]

Hi Setting new mask in MiningCore pool software is done at a global level for all sha256d coins .. this means BTC, BCH, FB etc.. will all be affected? since all of them works with the old mask "1fffe000" .. adding this new mask "1f7fe000" will the other coins be impacted in a negative way? or will i have to build a dedicated pool just for DGB now?

$ grep -R 1fffe000
src/Miningcore/Blockchain/Bitcoin/BitcoinConstants.cs: public const uint VersionRollingPoolMask = 0x1fffe000;

BTW would it not just be easier for DGB v9.26.3 just support the old mask like v8.x ?

[FullyElectric]

Confirmed .. changing MiningCore to the new mask 1f7fe000 works ... however ALL other sha256 coins on the same pool in now rejecting shares .. so this is not really a fix unless you only have a dedicated DGB pool.

[2026-07-02 21:54:22.0090] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLT] Using version-rolling mask 1f7fe000
[2026-07-02 21:54:22.0357] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLT] Setting static difficulty of 8192
[2026-07-02 21:54:40.3485] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLT] Share accepted: D=8192
[2026-07-02 21:54:40.6954] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLT] Share accepted: D=8192
[2026-07-02 21:54:40.8218] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLT] Share accepted: D=8192
[2026-07-02 21:54:48.3287] [I] [dgb-sha256-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLT] Share accepted: D=8192

BTC/BCH/etc... all affected by this new mask..

2026-07-02 21:56:34.4787] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLR] Share rejected: duplicate share [bitaxe/BM1370/v2.12.2]
[2026-07-02 21:56:34.5367] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLS] Share rejected: duplicate share [bitaxe/BM1370/v2.11.0-5-g8dc659c-dirty]
[2026-07-02 21:56:34.5367] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLR] Share rejected: duplicate share [bitaxe/BM1370/v2.12.2]
[2026-07-02 21:56:34.5954] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLS] Share rejected: duplicate share [bitaxe/BM1370/v2.11.0-5-g8dc659c-dirty]
[2026-07-02 21:56:34.6057] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLR] Share rejected: duplicate share [bitaxe/BM1370/v2.12.2]
[2026-07-02 21:56:34.6697] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLS] Share rejected: duplicate share [bitaxe/BM1370/v2.11.0-5-g8dc659c-dirty]
[2026-07-02 21:56:34.7193] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLS] Share rejected: duplicate share [bitaxe/BM1370/v2.11.0-5-g8dc659c-dirty]

..

can DGB v9.26.3 just add back support for the old mask !! this way no one will need to make any other changes after the upgrade!!

[2026-07-02 22:00:02.1901] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share rejected: rolling-version mask violation [NerdQAxe++/BM1370/v1.0.34-rc2.1-5-g69631cd-dirty]
[2026-07-02 22:00:05.6951] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share rejected: rolling-version mask violation [NerdQAxe++/BM1370/v1.0.34-rc2.1-5-g69631cd-dirty]
[2026-07-02 22:00:08.4811] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share accepted: D=16384
[2026-07-02 22:00:46.6834] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share rejected: rolling-version mask violation [NerdQAxe++/BM1370/v1.0.34-rc2.1-5-g69631cd-dirty]
[2026-07-02 22:00:54.8691] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share accepted: D=16384
[2026-07-02 22:01:15.6723] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share rejected: rolling-version mask violation [NerdQAxe++/BM1370/v1.0.34-rc2.1-5-g69631cd-dirty]
[2026-07-02 22:01:56.0359] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share accepted: D=16384
[2026-07-02 22:02:09.5315] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share accepted: D=16384
[2026-07-02 22:02:23.3848] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share accepted: D=16384
[2026-07-02 22:02:25.5095] [I] [bitcoin-cash-1] [0HNMOGHHSBBLB] Share rejected: rolling-version mask violation [NerdQAxe++/BM1370/v1.0.34-rc2.1-5-