View Single Post
Old 2020-01-06, 21:34   #24
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2·3·751 Posts
Default

The MurphyE score depends on other parameters that you didn't list. You also didn't list the polynomial, so I can't evaluate its quality myself.

You didn't list the large-prime bound parameters, nor lim0 and lim1, so I can't tell you how good or bad your param choices are.

I'd change I=16 to I=17, for a start.

If you know it is too large, why are you trying to factor it? Your machine isn't capable of finishing the job.

EDIT: Sorry, I had in mind a 768-bit number, not 1024-bit.
When the CADO group solved RSA768, they spent about 20 core-years on poly select. You spent 1 core-year (100 days * 4 cores, as a guess). So, you're about 5% of the way to "enough" for a number 1/1000th the difficulty of the one you're trying to factor.

So, a mere 500000 more core-days of poly select should be about right. Then, the sieving might take 20-30x that long, depending on how good your parameter choice is.

Your parameters are in the ballpark of decent for a 768-bit number, though.

Last fiddled with by VBCurtis on 2020-01-06 at 21:58
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote