On Saturday 05 Feb 2011 19:26:46 Juiceman wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Juiceman <juiceman69 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Juiceman <juiceman69 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Matthew Toseland
> >> <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote:
> >>> We need more seednodes. I will explain the broader situation below. If 
> >>> you can run a seednode - which means you need a forwarded port, a 
> >>> reasonably static IP address (or dyndns name), and a reasonable amount of 
> >>> bandwidth (especially upstream), and a reasonably stable node, please 
> >>> send me your opennet noderef (from the strangers page in advanced mode), 
> >>> and enable "Be a seednode" in the advanced config. Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> Details:
> >>>
> >>> One of the problems Freenet has at the moment is that bootstrapping a new 
> >>> node can take an awfully long time - 20 minutes or more sometimes. It is 
> >>> not clear why; we seem to either get rejected by seednodes (most of the 
> >>> time), or they return nothing, maybe a few "not wanted" notices, or they 
> >>> return lots of noderefs and we manage to announce.
> >>>
> >>> This might be due to bugs. 1343 fixed a bug that apparently badly 
> >>> affected some seednodes. However it appears most seednodes have upgraded 
> >>> now.
> >>>
> >>> There doesn't seem to be a problem with losing connections - backoff yes 
> >>> but once a node is connected it seems to mostly stay connected.
> >>>
> >>> The most likely answer seems to be that we just don't have enough 
> >>> seednodes to cope with the load.
> >>>
> >>> It is also possible that this is due to an attack. It did come on 
> >>> relatively suddenly a few weeks ago (it was bad before but it got much 
> >>> worse), and it seems to have got significantly worse in the last week. It 
> >>> is not clear how we would identify an attack if that was the problem; 
> >>> there are no obvious signs so far.
> >>>
> >>> It is also possible it is a client-side bug. Testing of the master branch 
> >>> would be useful, it has some small changes.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Errors in my log (build 1344)
> >
> > Also nodestats have been horrible on my seednode for last week or two.
> >  I am noticing node ping times in the 1500 - 3500 ms range.  Mostly
> > during daytime hours here (GMT -5).  Not sure if ATT Uverse has
> > quietly started throttling p2p (they say they don't), or if it is an
> > attack or bug.  Seeding for 206 is typical and didn't kill my node in
> > the past.  Let me know what logger settings to set and I can send you
> > my logs if you want.
> >
> > Peer statistics
> >
> >    * Connected: 15
> >    * Backed off: 3
> >    * Too old: 67
> >    * Disconnected: 13
> >    * Never connected: 5
> >    * Clock Problem: 1
> >    * Seeding for: 206
> >    * Max peers: 36
> >    * Max strangers: 36
> >
> > Bandwidth
> >
> >    * Input Rate: 48.2 KiB/s (of 1.0 MiB/s)
> >    * Output Rate: 31.6 KiB/s (of 105 KiB/s)
> >    * Session Total Input: 49.2 MiB (43.7 KiB/s average)
> >    * Session Total Output: 35.7 MiB (31.7 KiB/s average)
> >    * Payload Output: 214 KiB (190 B/sec)(0%)
> >
> 
> Node status overview
> 
>     * bwlimitDelayTime: 2947ms
>     * bwlimitDelayTimeBulk: 2893ms
>     * bwlimitDelayTimeRT: 9078ms
>     * nodeAveragePingTime: 2315ms
>     * darknetSizeEstimateSession: 0 nodes
>     * opennetSizeEstimateSession: 833 nodes
>     * nodeUptimeSession: 26m34s
>     * nodeUptimeTotal: 8w2d
>     * routingMissDistanceLocal: 0.0650
>     * routingMissDistanceRemote: 0.0141
>     * routingMissDistanceOverall: 0.0261
>     * backedOffPercent: 22.3%
>     * pInstantReject: 95.8%
>     * unclaimedFIFOSize: 2663
>     * RAMBucketPoolSize: 12.8 MiB / 150 MiB
>     * uptimeAverage: 99.3%

Ping times that high mean your node won't accept any requests at all, although 
it might accept some announcements.

Usually this is caused by network or CPU problems. When I've run my seednode 
lately it hasn't had high ping times, nor have any of my other nodes.

The NPE is fixed btw.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20110211/13413e58/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to