On 6/9/06, Ed Tomlinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Its been _correctly_ pointed out to me that posting connection info is a BAD
idea (SORRY).
I have been using freenet for years. I posted quickly with blinders on.
Suspect I will not be
the last to make this sort of error. Why do we not move the ip/name:port field
into the details
page? This way if/when this sort of info is posted much less is given away.
Thanks,
Ed
On Friday 09 June 2006 07:31, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> nextgens r9080 | zothar | 2006-06-08 06:06:33 +0200 (jeu, 08 jun 2006) | 1
line
> nextgens Chemins modifis :
> nextgens M /trunk/freenet/src/freenet/node/PeerNode.java
> nextgens Refactor sentHandshake() and couldNotSendHandshake() to share code
paths.
> nextgens I would bet that it's the problem
> nextgens people seeing backoff, what version are you running ?
> nextgens pre or post r9080 ?
>
> I currently have 9 connections with 6 backed off:
>
> nserts: 2
> Requests: 2
> Transferring Requests: 0
> ARK Fetch Requests: 8
>
> CONNECTED: 3
> BACKED OFF: 6
> DISCONNECTED: 14
>
> and
>
> CONNECTED BurntToast 82.34.170.133:28863 (625ms) Fred,0.7,1.0,765
0.45966942608650907 0/5/ForwardRejectedOverload 0m
> CONNECTED Heghlu'meH 80.133.151.215:8010 (580ms) Fred,0.7,1.0,787
0.11487105409025133 0/5/AcceptedTimeout 0m
> CONNECTED nanelmoth 8.7.49.235:32647 (491ms) Fred,0.7,1.0,781
0.10337429496720563 0/5/AfterInsertAcceptedTimeout2 0m
> BACKED OFF Apophis 85.10.199.232:1103 (595ms) Fred,0.7,1.0,780
0.11015025723445537 701/1280/AcceptedTimeout 0m
> BACKED OFF FredIsMyFriend 84.154.75.10:27025 (716ms) Fred,0.7,1.0,787
0.1109663996605127 522/5120/ForwardRejectedOverload 0m
> BACKED OFF sitharusdotcom 60.234.236.202:9015 (814ms) Fred,0.7,1.0,787
0.4187372334972036 7442/10800/ForwardRejectedOverload 0m
> BACKED OFF Toad/dark 82.32.17.1:24374 (644ms) Fred,0.7,1.0,785
0.452479314480818 121/640/AcceptedTimeout 0m
> BACKED OFF Zothar130 129.107.39.54:38949 (709ms) Fred,0.7,1.0,787
0.15816777656083858 6297/10800/AcceptedTimeout 0m
> BACKED OFF Zothar70 70.242.96.71:38942 (1019ms) Fred,0.7,1.0,787
0.10091296456108578 2778/10800/ForwardRejectedOverload 0m
>
> How about others?
>
> Ed
>
> BTW. Given that my nodes 'busy' profile, in terms of network traffic, varies
by the second I strongly
> suggest we try start backoff at a smaller number say 0.5 seconds so the first
backoff interval would be
> up to 1 second (as opposed to 10 seconds). I predict this is will lead to a
smoother use of the
> available bandwidth.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tech mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
>
>
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
If that is done I'd like the location to be moved too.
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
