Re: Fwd: [freenet-support] bug in 6430
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 05:31:33PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ==BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE== Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 11:16:31 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 X-AOL-IP: 172.180.239.238 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [freenet-support] bug in 6430 X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List-Id: support.freenetproject.org List-Unsubscribe: http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-Archive: http://dodo.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support List-Post: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List-Subscribe: http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I just do not know, where to report this, (probably it was noticed already anyway...), but the bandwith limiting in unstable version 6430 seems to be broken: Current upstream bandwidth usage 14576 bytes/second (145,8%) And the node is not QueryRejecting or something like that and the load is on 82% right now... Hope it is fixed soon, since this bug blocks your internet connection, by using the whole available upload bandwith :/ I can't reproduce that. Example: Current routingTime 39ms Current messageSendTimeRequest 255ms Pooled threads running jobs 10 (8.3%) Pooled threads which are idle 8 Current upstream bandwidth usage17086 bytes/second (85.4%) Current estimated load 100% Reason for load: Load due to thread limit = 8.3% Load due to messageSendTimeRequest = 30.2% = 60% + 40% * (255.497 - 1000.000) / 1000.000 = overloadLow (60%) Load due to output bandwidth limiting = 106.8% because outputBytes(1025189) limit (96.014 ) = outLimitCutoff (0.8) * outputBandwidthLimit (2) * 60 Can anyone else? -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] bug in 6430
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:10:36PM -0500, Edward J. Huff wrote: On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 11:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just do not know, where to report this, (probably it was noticed already anyway...), but the bandwith limiting in unstable version 6430 seems to be broken: Current upstream bandwidth usage 14576 bytes/second (145,8%) And the node is not QueryRejecting or something like that and the load is on 82% right now... Hope it is fixed soon, since this bug blocks your internet connection, by using the whole available upload bandwith :/ Change outputBandwidthLimit to about 1/4 of what you had before. Should help a little. I have the problem too. Presently the low level bandwidth limiting is off, and Freenet seems to be working better as a result. The high level bandwidth limiting is not very accurate, because it relies on rejecting queries to cause bandwidth usage to drop. Yes, but is the high level limiting working for what it is supposed to do? -- Ed Huff ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] General question
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 09:29:35AM -0600, Chris wrote: I used to use Freenet on a dialup modem with only my OpenBSD firewall/NAT box between me and the internet (my ISP just did straight packet passing, back then). This was 1999-2000-ish :) Back then, Freenet and fproxy were CLI only, but despite a slight lack of content it worked pretty well and felt fairly snappy in response to requests for data (either you got it within a few minutes, or you didn't get it at all, and inserts almost always seemed to work). There were no directories, but there were ways to find content, and I could publish and retrieve stuff when I wanted to, with a bit of patience. I just got back into Freenet in 2004 with broadband and the nifty new windows GUI 0.5.2.7, and I'm sort of amazed that Freenet really seems to be... gone. Content is inaccessible, inserts are usually non-working, and despite the purty GUI, it really seems to be 95% nonfunctional, unlike the freenet that I remember from just a few years ago. I guess what this boils down to is - - Is Freenet choking hardcore, or do I have technical issues? I'd love to run a node now that I'm up 24x7. - I'm root on my firewall/NAT box, but I have another firewall and another NAT appliance of some kind upstream of me now, and I have no control over these. Any kind of stateful connection works great, and UDP works as well, but inbound stateless requests (FTP, DCC, etc) get eaten at the ISP's NAT box. I don't think I can do anything about that. I don't know anything about freenet's protocols, but I can't imagine that they're stateless? You will not be able to run an effective permanent node if you can't accpet incoming connections on the listenPort :( Any insight appreciated :) Thank you. --Chris (SYN! ACK!) -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] Advice on building a specialised node
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 12:51:30PM +, Roger Hayter wrote: Can anyone advise me where I might start looking to modify a node so it rejects all requests outside a small area of keyspace? I presume there must be a routine that accepts requests for further processing, and one it could call to send a rejection. I want to try this not least to see if NGR routing will actually favour this narrow area, over nice, rapid rejections everywhere else, and whether my node's ability to find data in this keyspace will improve. (I have previously put forward the unsubstantiated theory that NGR will only produce specialised routing when this has speed advantages over searching the whole network through as many fast nodes as possible - so I don't expect my node's specialisation to be sustained after switching off this gate, I think this would require either a completely naive network with no data or routing info, or a large proportion of nodes to be seeded with an arbitrary specialisation for NGR to build on. However, as no one important agrees this is a possibility, I just want to try one node and see what happens.) Try freenet.node.Node, the function acceptRequest(). The difficulty I might have with this is illustrated by the fact I always thought Java was an interpreter - but apparently the source code for Fred needs to be compiled in some way - so can someone also recommend a free compiler to go from CVS to the constituents of freenet.jar? You can use Sun's JDK... it's not Free Software, but it is freely downloadable from their site... Otherwise jikes maybe, but you'll need to use Sun's VM for now anyway. -- Roger Hayter -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] Connection between stable and unstable network
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 06:31:48PM +, Roger Hayter wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Stephen Mollett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Hi, --- Roger Hayter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone noticed that Frost messages in some popular boards seem almost all to be retrievable both from the stable and the unstable network? ... doesn't this suggest that some nodes must be connecting to both networks? I haven't noticed this (I've never had much luck with Frost) but are you using two totally separate nodes for browsing? Yes If you're just switching one node between the networks then, after switching, the datastore will still have the messages cached after they were retrieved on the other network. On the same topic, would it be a good idea (or indeed feasible) to run two nodes, one on each network, with the same datastore encryption key, which are periodically stopped and synchronised in order to narrow the schism between the networks and aid the flow of content? Regards, Stephen Perhaps people doing this is one possible explanation of my observation. More likely is simply that we get new nodes migrating from stable to unstable constantly, bringing their datastore with them. = -- Roger Hayter ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] Connection between stable and unstable network
On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 01:01:19PM +, Stephen Mollett wrote: Hi, --- Roger Hayter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone noticed that Frost messages in some popular boards seem almost all to be retrievable both from the stable and the unstable network? ... doesn't this suggest that some nodes must be connecting to both networks? I haven't noticed this (I've never had much luck with Frost) but are you using two totally separate nodes for browsing? If you're just switching one node between the networks then, after switching, the datastore will still have the messages cached after they were retrieved on the other network. On the same topic, would it be a good idea (or indeed feasible) to run two nodes, one on each network, with the same datastore encryption key, which are periodically stopped and synchronised in order to narrow the schism between the networks and aid the flow of content? It would even be possible to spider the network, or scan one's store, and then reinsert data onto a different network, without necessarily knowing the decrypted contents or the SSK keys. However unstablenet is a lot smaller than stablenet, so it wouldn't be very practical. Regards, Stephen = == Buy a Pentium 4 (tm) for more accurate errors, faster crashes, brighter blue screens and quicker reboots! Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly...Ping your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] Connection between stable and unstable network
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 01:55:15AM +, Toad wrote: On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 01:01:19PM +, Stephen Mollett wrote: Hi, --- Roger Hayter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone noticed that Frost messages in some popular boards seem almost all to be retrievable both from the stable and the unstable network? ... doesn't this suggest that some nodes must be connecting to both networks? I haven't noticed this (I've never had much luck with Frost) but are you using two totally separate nodes for browsing? If you're just switching one node between the networks then, after switching, the datastore will still have the messages cached after they were retrieved on the other network. On the same topic, would it be a good idea (or indeed feasible) to run two nodes, one on each network, with the same datastore encryption key, which are periodically stopped and synchronised in order to narrow the schism between the networks and aid the flow of content? It would even be possible to spider the network, or scan one's store, and then reinsert data onto a different network, without necessarily knowing the decrypted contents or the SSK keys. However unstablenet is a lot smaller than stablenet, so it wouldn't be very practical. Well, it'd be possible with software support for raw inserts. Spidering one network, downloading the raw data for each key, and then doing a raw insert on the other network, would be quite feasible. Regards, Stephen = == Buy a Pentium 4 (tm) for more accurate errors, faster crashes, brighter blue screens and quicker reboots! Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly...Ping your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
