On Friday 31 October 2003 07:37, Ian Clarke wrote:
So, this email is an invitation to anyone that has constructive
criticism or suggestion's for how Freenet's first impression can be
enhanced. Topics include installation, FProxy, even the website's layout.
Ian.
The splitfile interface
But I'm not that person, FYI.
--
Americans generally do the right thing, after first exhausting all the available
alternatives.
- Winston Churchill
___
support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greetings,
I'm reposting an earlier reply to Matthew about an issue that I'm still puzzling
over. I think Matthew may not have noticed my reply, and I think his original
reply to my original post about dealing with asymmetric connections replicates a
mistaken conclusion that I also made. If
On Thursday 21 November 2002 10:14 am, you wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 09:26:10AM -0500, Doug Bostrom wrote:
Greetings,
(blah blah)
As I understand it, some requests arriving at my node are forwarded to
other nodes, with the results being passed back through my node toward
11/13/02 4:42:36 PM, Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have things pinched off to 10K up and down, on the premise that since we're on
ADSL here I can't
allow more
That's the combined limit or the individual limits?
Individual.
I use 20k down, 5k up, on a 512/128 cable modem (I have
Greetings,
534 seems to be running just great. For me there's just one remaining problem, which
is that I still don't seem
to be able to get bandwidth under control.
I have things pinched off to 10K up and down, on the premise that since we're on ADSL
here I can't allow more
relayed data
The internal IP address will have to be that of the box actually running the
node, not the firewall's internal address. Also don't forget that with that
model firewall you'll need to reboot it once virtual server changes are made.
On Monday 04 November 2002 09:01 pm, you wrote:
Im new to the
You need to set transient=false. You may also want to set
overloadlow=.60 and overloadhigh=.65
--
Democracies die behind closed doors.
- Judge Damon Keith
___
support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
11/2/02 4:41:37 PM, Silver Tear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know transient=false has to be set, thats not the problem. The problem is
once it is set to be a 24/7 node, it won't accept any connections from me.
The reason I mention transient is that in the config file you included in your mail it
11/2/02 3:54:02 PM, Darren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
overloadlow? overloadhigh?
Are these new/undocumented settings?
I am using http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/twiki/view/Main/CLO as my freenet.conf
reference...is there a
better location?
overloadhigh and overloadlow are in the config file,
Questions regarding the correct method to stop and restart a node. This
morning I upgraded to 604 and started it, and it runs very well.
I stopped the node to reload some relaxed paramenters in freenet.conf and
then restarted it, all within about 30 seconds or a minute. As soon as the
node
On Thursday 31 October 2002 10:34 am, you wrote:
Questions regarding the correct method to stop and restart a node. This
morning I upgraded to 604 and started it, and it runs very well.
I stopped the node to reload some relaxed paramenters in freenet.conf and
then restarted it, all within
Greetings,
Checking my node this morning, (after waiting for top to come up, swap swap swap) I
found I had some 155 java
processes going. Any way to control this? Right now I can either run a node or work,
not both. Maxnodeconnections
seems to have no effect on the number of connections the
On Tuesday 29 October 2002 01:55 pm, you wrote:
Use the bandwidth limiter to prevent it swamping your connection. It is
expected to use lots (up to 120) threads - they should normally be
almost all idling. The current situation is a product of the network
being slashdotted, and
On Tuesday 29 October 2002 12:45 pm, you wrote:
I wanted to write and tell you how displeased I am with your software. I
installed it and it is cumbersome to use. It is being touted as a P2P app.
This does not appear to be the case. Never could figure it out. I made
yadda-yadda
That has
On Tuesday 29 October 2002 05:09 pm, you wrote:
Freenet 0.5.0.2 is now available for download. Please upgrade to this
version, and inform us of any problems. This includes some important
load balancing code that should help the network to get out of the dire
state it is in following Monday's
Pipe still saturates. I cut maxthreads to 40, then 20. Connections stayed at 45,
pooled jobs at 98, java
processes somewhere over 100. Load at 90+.
Bandwidth adjustments via freenet.conf have zero effect.
OTH, I don't see in the support thread that others are having the same issue with
10/29/02 9:59:00 PM, Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting. The bandwidth limiter is not working then?
Not as far as I can tell, or least very little. I have bandwidth set to 8k both ways,
threads set to 20, and
I'm showing something like 200 processes right just now and my
Persistent node (525) here showing 100% load (106% and change right now) most of the
time. Is this something to
worry about? And if it is, is there any information you'd like to see?
--
Democracies die behind closed doors.
- Judge Damon Keith
___
Partly as an experiment to see if I can reduce the load on my node
reduced and partly to see if I can restore
Net connectivity to users here on the lan I've been playing around with
freenet.config bandwidth and
maxnodeconnections parameters. I've cut (and obviously I don't want
these to be
Partly as an experiment to see if I can reduce the load on my node reduced and partly
to see if I can restore
Net connectivity to users here on the lan I've been playing around with freenet.config
bandwidth and
maxnodeconnections parameters. I've cut (and obviously I don't want these to be
For today, anyway. I've now got maxnodeconnections set to just 10, hoping that I can
throttle traffic back to the point where other types of traffic can work here along
with
Freenet. Looking at my connections page on fproxy, I see it's reporting 48 connections
even with the ridiculously scaled
At this point is it better for Freenet for a persistent node to be running .5 or the
600 builds, if a node
operator must choose?
--
Democracies die behind closed doors.
- Judge Damon Keith
___
support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmm, just updated with 524 and for the first time since running the 5xx
builds I cannot retrieve FE. Ran out of runway at 15 hops. GPL is gettable
though. Persistent node here.
--
Sometimes things aren't exactly black and white when it comes to accounting
procedures.
- George W. Bush
You ain't seen nothing yet. Hop times are about to reduce by a factor of
3, at least.
You mean beyond what we've already seen w/ the 5pre stuff so far? And how?
Thanks!
--
Democracies die behind closed doors.
- Judge Damon Keith
___
support
Now that 5pre is out, I'm seeing my datastore filling rapidly. 3 days ago I started
with the default 200MB
allocation, I had to increase that to 400MB yesterday, and today I moved the ds over
to an unused 2GB drive on
the box the node is on. I don't expect the new disk to last long given the
Wondering if anybody else has seen this. I've been running 0.3.9.1 on i386 Linux
2.2.14 w/ IBM JDK 1.3. successfully since 0.3.9.1 was released. Tons of traffic, lots
of
storage and retrieval happening, everything seemed to be working smoothly. A couple of
days ago the box the whole affair
27 matches
Mail list logo
