[freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1194
Matthew Toseland wrote: > Freenet 0.7 build 1194 is now available. Please upgrade, this will be > mandatory on Friday. Some fairly substantial changes: It looks like the infamous "# peers forcibly disconnected" bug is gone in this release, thanks and congratulations! (I see far less package handling related messages in the logfiles.) While I'm at it: Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Peter.
[freenet-support] Freenet and firewall
On Thursday 18 December 2008 22:03, 3BUIb3S50i 3BUIb3S50i wrote: > My idea: > Interpose at least one "foreign IP address" between sender and recipient of > a same country. > The goal: isolate the sender and recipient. > The "foreign IP address" is a "country" that cooperates little, or doesn't > cooperate. > For example: > USA --> Venezuela --> USA > USA --> Russia --> Venezuela --> USA > China --> USA --> China > Etc. > Friends are unnecessary. The authorities and lobbies artists are more > difficult to trap users. > > What do you think? This has been proposed before. I believe there is a VPN-based network on such principles (always jump a nation boundary on each hop). I would point out that the set of such antipathic relationships is quite small. On Freenet, it wouldn't help much IMHO (on opennet i.e. Strangers, it is possible to attack the network without compromising nodes) and would have a considerable performance cost. There was a design decision taken that if you have security level NORMAL and therefore use opennet you want adequate (if not stellar) performance; high security and opennet do not go together on Freenet's architecture, so options that cost a lot of performance are disabled by default on NORMAL; HIGH turns off opennet. However if somebody sends a patch and some mechanism to update the IP mappings, we would consider having it as an option. > > > On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 4:31 AM, Luke771 wrote: > > > On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:31:46 +0100 > > "3BUIb3S50i 3BUIb3S50i" <3buib3s50i at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Thank you for your reply. > > > > > > I tried to block all traffic. Everything is blocked, except Freenet and > > > TOR. > > > > > > I wanted to allow only the IP ranges of some countries. And allow > > connection > > > to seednodes. This is an intermediate solution between darknet and > > opennet. > > > > No, this is nonsense. > > You can run darknet, opennet, or even both side by side, but there's no > > such thing as an 'intermediate solution' The idea of blocking whole > > countries (based on -what? biased information from the propaganda machine?) > > makes no sense at all. Please reconsider your position. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20081224/8cfedf5f/attachment.pgp>
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet and firewall
On Thursday 18 December 2008 22:03, 3BUIb3S50i 3BUIb3S50i wrote: My idea: Interpose at least one foreign IP address between sender and recipient of a same country. The goal: isolate the sender and recipient. The foreign IP address is a country that cooperates little, or doesn't cooperate. For example: USA -- Venezuela -- USA USA -- Russia -- Venezuela -- USA China -- USA -- China Etc. Friends are unnecessary. The authorities and lobbies artists are more difficult to trap users. What do you think? This has been proposed before. I believe there is a VPN-based network on such principles (always jump a nation boundary on each hop). I would point out that the set of such antipathic relationships is quite small. On Freenet, it wouldn't help much IMHO (on opennet i.e. Strangers, it is possible to attack the network without compromising nodes) and would have a considerable performance cost. There was a design decision taken that if you have security level NORMAL and therefore use opennet you want adequate (if not stellar) performance; high security and opennet do not go together on Freenet's architecture, so options that cost a lot of performance are disabled by default on NORMAL; HIGH turns off opennet. However if somebody sends a patch and some mechanism to update the IP mappings, we would consider having it as an option. On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 4:31 AM, Luke771 luke...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:31:46 +0100 3BUIb3S50i 3BUIb3S50i 3buib3s...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you for your reply. I tried to block all traffic. Everything is blocked, except Freenet and TOR. I wanted to allow only the IP ranges of some countries. And allow connection to seednodes. This is an intermediate solution between darknet and opennet. No, this is nonsense. You can run darknet, opennet, or even both side by side, but there's no such thing as an 'intermediate solution' The idea of blocking whole countries (based on -what? biased information from the propaganda machine?) makes no sense at all. Please reconsider your position. pgplvQxuLU6l2.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1194
Matthew Toseland wrote: Freenet 0.7 build 1194 is now available. Please upgrade, this will be mandatory on Friday. Some fairly substantial changes: It looks like the infamous # peers forcibly disconnected bug is gone in this release, thanks and congratulations! (I see far less package handling related messages in the logfiles.) While I'm at it: Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Peter. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0.7 build 1194
I still get this: * Probably a bug: please report: 2 peers forcibly disconnected due to not acknowledging packets. * Probably a bug: please report: 1 peers forcibly disconnected due to not acknowledging packets. with * Freenet 0.7 Build #1194 r24387 * Freenet-ext Build #26 r23771 after this nodeUptime: 1d21h Merry Christmas On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 17:13, SmallSister development smallsis...@xs4all.nl wrote: Matthew Toseland wrote: Freenet 0.7 build 1194 is now available. Please upgrade, this will be mandatory on Friday. Some fairly substantial changes: It looks like the infamous # peers forcibly disconnected bug is gone in this release, thanks and congratulations! (I see far less package handling related messages in the logfiles.) While I'm at it: Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Peter. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe -- __ GnuPG key: (0x48DBFA8A) Keyserver: pgpkeys.pca.dfn.de Fingerprint: 477D F057 1BD4 1AE7 8A54 8679 6690 E2EC 48DB FA8A __ ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
