RE: [freenet-support] Freenet stable build 5063
No, permanent. The numbers have moved slightly since yesterday but they're
still good:
Uptime 35 hours.
Probability of success of an incoming request
22-Jan-2004 07:31:04
0 | 0.33023256
1 | 0.20754717
2 | 0.2094763
3 | 0.14257425
4 | 0.1953125
5 | 0.2006689
6 | 0.15882353
7 | 0.23024055
8 | 0.0941337
9 | 0.06840391
a | 0.078538105
b | 0.16099072
c | 0.25862068
d | 0.19318181
e | 0.22033899
f | 0.24892704
Max: 0.33023256
Most successful: 0
inboundConnectionRatio still ~85%
routingTime 15ms
outputBytesTrailerChunks/outputBytes=0.54
RAM usage creeping up: 200-240MB now (It'll probably OOM soon, as it's got
a 256MB limit.)
CPU still ~20%
Total amount of data transmitted/received 1,961 MiB/2,506 MiB
Kevin.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Toad
Sent: 22 January 2004 01:45
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet stable build 5063
Your numbers are amazing, and far higher than mine or those of another
node I've been able to check. Is this a transient node?
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 05:00:41PM -, Kevin Bennett wrote:
Been running this for 20 hours now, and I have to say it rocks :)
Splitfiles in Frost and Fuqid are coming down at a rate of about 10k/s,
about 15-20x the rate they were coming down a week ago and DBR freesites
that were slow to arrive are now arriving usually within a few minutes.
If you want stats, here's a few that seem useful. If you want more, just
ask as I don't know which are the most useful.
According to the connection manager page, in 20 hours it's transferred
1.1GB
up and 1.5GB down, way more than for the last few weeks (excepting the
brief
surge when 5054 was still small). Memory usage varies between 150-170MB,
CPU usage ~20% of an AMD 2500+.
Success probabilities are huge in comparison with previous builds:
Probability of success of an incoming request
21-Jan-2004 16:39:26
0 | 0.31746033
1 | 0.22285715
2 | 0.19723183
3 | 0.14285715
4 | 0.24358974
5 | 0.2173913
6 | 0.13824885
7 | 0.23214285
8 | 0.13261649
9 | 0.08004926
a | 0.07307172
b | 0.12169312
c | 0.26865673
d | 0.16981132
e | 0.26573426
f | 0.25
Max: 0.31746033
Most successful: 0
Last week these were all, without exception, 0.01.
inboundConnectionRatio is ~85%.
routingTime is ~17ms.
outputBytesTrailerChunks/outputBytes=0.58
Once again: nice job guys :)
Kevin.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Toad
Sent: 20 January 2004 19:56
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [freenet-support] Freenet stable build 5063
Freenet stable build 5063 is now available. {snip}
___
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
Re: [freenet-support] Problem with Windows (or perhaps Microsoft)
On 21 Jan 2004 at 19:43, Nicholas Sturm wrote: Since you announced the last stable release I have been unable to download a new release. Background: For about a month I have gotten sporadic replacement of URLs by Internet Explorer by the following: http://www.marsfind.com/ufts.php?ver=100uid=00063dc614af4a85aefef19c015d5f3 dstatus=-2146697211 query=http%3A%2F%2Fstart.earthlink.net%2F Can't help with the rest of it, but the above looks suspiciously like the sort of thing you might expect some worms, trojans, or spyware to do. It's not a site that tries to sell things, by chance, or is blasted with advertising? Your IE may have a parasite -- reinstall it after uninstalling to remove any trace of the old. Mid-term, turn off *#! Javascript -- it turns your browser into a ticking bomb! Lastly, in the long term, do consider moving to Linux eventually. ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
RE: [freenet-support] FreeBSD : IPAddressDetector : SocketExceptiontrying to detect NetworkInterfaces
This is not a problem with freenet. I might be a JVM bug.. Maybe it has something to do with IPv6/IPv4 interfaces or something, do you have any IPv6 interfaces? Read here to see that this can happen wheter or not freenet is involved. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.devel.java/2866 And read here to see that we too have encountered the problem before and to learn the workaround I suggested at that time (please verify if it works). http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support/1196 Regards /N -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tapio Valli Sent: den 21 januari 2004 18:25 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [freenet-support] FreeBSD : IPAddressDetector : SocketExceptiontrying to detect NetworkInterfaces Correcting the *** header/subject, sorry about that. Hello, I am having difficulties my emails through to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I use that address but my mails haven't made it to list so far? Anyway, my problem below persists and now it appears to be blocking the connectivity for Frost client as Frost can't update lists and in freenet.log I am getting lots of these : Jan 18, 2004 1:20:46 PM (freenet.node.IPAddressDetector, QThread-879, ERROR): No addresses found! Jan 18, 2004 1:20:57 PM (freenet.node.IPAddressDetector, QThread-856, ERROR): No addresses found! Jan 18, 2004 1:21:08 PM (freenet.node.IPAddressDetector, QThread-879, ERROR): No addresses found! Jan 18, 2004 1:21:19 PM (freenet.node.IPAddressDetector, QThread-894, ERROR): No addresses found! Jan 18, 2004 1:21:29 PM (freenet.node.IPAddressDetector, QThread-896, ERROR): No addresses found! Please refer to below email for more details : On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:09:44 +0200 Tapio Valli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I am running the stable 5060 build with following system : javavm -version Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM java version 1.4.1 Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build Blackdown-1.4.1-01) Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build Blackdown-1.4.1-01, mixed mode) FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT My freenet.conf should be ok as well as my NAT/port forwarding. Right at start-up of the node, I get : Jan 15, 2004 6:53:38 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): Read node file Jan 15, 2004 6:53:42 PM (freenet.node.IPAddressDetector, main, ERROR): SocketException trying to detect NetworkInterfaces java.net.SocketException: Bad address at java.net.NetworkInterface.getAll(Native Method) at java.net.NetworkInterface.getNetworkInterfaces(NetworkInterface.java:2 04) at freenet.node.IPAddressDetector.checkpoint(IPAddressDetector.java:96) at freenet.node.IPAddressDetector.getAddress(IPAddressDetector.java:68) at freenet.node.IPAddressDetector.getAddress(IPAddressDetector.java:49) at freenet.node.Main.main(Main.java:605) Jan 15, 2004 6:53:45 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): starting filesystem But the node starts anyhow. How significant is this and what I can do to fix it? When running, I get these, like 2-3 times a minute. Thanks, Tapio Valli -- -- ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] Latest build: 5070 ??
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 22:08:30 -0500 Paul Derbyshire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 18 Jan 2004 at 5:24, S wrote: Anyone can change the latest build number by editing Version.java and compiling the source on their machine. If you were so inclined, you could change your latest build number to and confuse a whole lot of people. Apparently someone has compiled their own copy of Freenet and changed their version number to 5070. Perhaps nodes shouldn't be generating that message based on the reported version numbers of other nodes, While this is likely very low on the priority list, it should be sufficient to implement an I know of a newer build message, and wait until multiple nodes have told us that they know of multiple instances of the same newer build. Instead of taking one node's word for it, we'd wait for corroboration (I know there is no trust, I'm not looking to bring that up again). e.g. I connect to Nodes A, B, C, D, ... N, with build 5063. Node A says I have 5 nodes in my RT labelled as build 5064. Node B says I have 11 nodes in my RT labelled as build 5064, and 1 node labelled as build . Node C says I have 6 nodes in my RT labelled as build 5064. Node D says nothing because it knows of no nodes running any build greater than mine, 5063. Node N says I have 1 node in my RT labelled as build 5064, and 1 node labelled as build . At some point, after hearing that X % of the nodes I'm connected to each have at least Y nodes with build 5064 in their RT, my node decides OK, 5064 probably exists, I'll list it as a newer build on the web interface. The advertisement of build is ignored because Y for never exceeded 1, X for is too low, or both. This scenario prohibits a lone node from fooling everyone else's node into thinking a newer build has been released. With 5 as an acceptable value for Y, someone would need to run their bogus-version-number build on at least 5 different nodes, which is a lot of work just to pull a prank. I suspect that most of the weird build numbers we've seen are from people experimenting, not from people trying to undermine the Latest Build feature. The downside to using this method is that it would introduce a delay in the announcement of newer builds to users who only find out about newer builds through their node's web interface. -s ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet stable build 5063
They are still ludicrous. In that they don't happen anywhere else.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 07:49:05AM -, Kevin Bennett wrote:
No, permanent. The numbers have moved slightly since yesterday but they're
still good:
Uptime 35 hours.
Probability of success of an incoming request
22-Jan-2004 07:31:04
0 | 0.33023256
1 | 0.20754717
2 | 0.2094763
3 | 0.14257425
4 | 0.1953125
5 | 0.2006689
6 | 0.15882353
7 | 0.23024055
8 | 0.0941337
9 | 0.06840391
a | 0.078538105
b | 0.16099072
c | 0.25862068
d | 0.19318181
e | 0.22033899
f | 0.24892704
Max: 0.33023256
Most successful: 0
inboundConnectionRatio still ~85%
routingTime 15ms
outputBytesTrailerChunks/outputBytes=0.54
RAM usage creeping up: 200-240MB now (It'll probably OOM soon, as it's got
a 256MB limit.)
CPU still ~20%
Total amount of data transmitted/received 1,961 MiB/2,506 MiB
Kevin.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Toad
Sent: 22 January 2004 01:45
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet stable build 5063
Your numbers are amazing, and far higher than mine or those of another
node I've been able to check. Is this a transient node?
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 05:00:41PM -, Kevin Bennett wrote:
Been running this for 20 hours now, and I have to say it rocks :)
Splitfiles in Frost and Fuqid are coming down at a rate of about 10k/s,
about 15-20x the rate they were coming down a week ago and DBR freesites
that were slow to arrive are now arriving usually within a few minutes.
If you want stats, here's a few that seem useful. If you want more, just
ask as I don't know which are the most useful.
According to the connection manager page, in 20 hours it's transferred
1.1GB
up and 1.5GB down, way more than for the last few weeks (excepting the
brief
surge when 5054 was still small). Memory usage varies between 150-170MB,
CPU usage ~20% of an AMD 2500+.
Success probabilities are huge in comparison with previous builds:
Probability of success of an incoming request
21-Jan-2004 16:39:26
0 | 0.31746033
1 | 0.22285715
2 | 0.19723183
3 | 0.14285715
4 | 0.24358974
5 | 0.2173913
6 | 0.13824885
7 | 0.23214285
8 | 0.13261649
9 | 0.08004926
a | 0.07307172
b | 0.12169312
c | 0.26865673
d | 0.16981132
e | 0.26573426
f | 0.25
Max: 0.31746033
Most successful: 0
Last week these were all, without exception, 0.01.
inboundConnectionRatio is ~85%.
routingTime is ~17ms.
outputBytesTrailerChunks/outputBytes=0.58
Once again: nice job guys :)
Kevin.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Toad
Sent: 20 January 2004 19:56
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [freenet-support] Freenet stable build 5063
Freenet stable build 5063 is now available. {snip}
___
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
Re: [freenet-support] where is the routing table in 5063?
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 11:08:58PM -0600, S wrote: I think he means the big barcode visual of the keyspace. It must be incompatible with NGR, because it disappeared from stable once before, back when NGR was first tested. It is. We have an estimator graph instead. -s On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 20:41:51 + Toad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You mean from the web interface? http://127.0.0.1:/servlet/nodestatus/nodestatus.html - as it always has been. On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 06:13:26PM +0100, Max Moritz Sievers wrote: where is the routing table in 5063? with regards, Max Moritz Sievers -- 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
Re: [freenet-support] Harvester problem ?
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 02:30:52PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Current seednodes.ref is 5.6Mb, filled with this kind of lines Estimator.erTransferSuccess.Store.7.Key=69888e24fa0323034be788eac1b82cf1dab6c6b4701f40 Estimator.erTransferSuccess.Store.7.Time=dd4 I crash my stable node; is this normal ? The above is normal. Nodes crashing is not normal :) Ciao. Marco -- + il Progetto Freenet - segui il coniglio bianco+ * the Freenet Project - follow the white rabbit* * Marco A. Calamari[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.marcoc.it* * PGP RSA: ED84 3839 6C4D 3FFE 389F 209E 3128 5698 * + DSS/DH: 8F3E 5BAE 906F B416 9242 1C10 8661 24A9 BFCE 822B + ___ 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] Freenet stable build 5063
So is there any other data I could send you that would help pinpoint just
why my node is working so (ludicrously) well?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Toad
Sent: 22 January 2004 14:35
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet stable build 5063
They are still ludicrous. In that they don't happen anywhere else.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 07:49:05AM -, Kevin Bennett wrote:
No, permanent. The numbers have moved slightly since yesterday but
they're
still good:
Uptime 35 hours.
Probability of success of an incoming request
22-Jan-2004 07:31:04
0 | 0.33023256
1 | 0.20754717
2 | 0.2094763
3 | 0.14257425
4 | 0.1953125
5 | 0.2006689
6 | 0.15882353
7 | 0.23024055
8 | 0.0941337
9 | 0.06840391
a | 0.078538105
b | 0.16099072
c | 0.25862068
d | 0.19318181
e | 0.22033899
f | 0.24892704
Max: 0.33023256
Most successful: 0
inboundConnectionRatio still ~85%
routingTime 15ms
outputBytesTrailerChunks/outputBytes=0.54
RAM usage creeping up: 200-240MB now (It'll probably OOM soon, as it's
got
a 256MB limit.)
CPU still ~20%
Total amount of data transmitted/received 1,961 MiB/2,506 MiB
Kevin.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Toad
Sent: 22 January 2004 01:45
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet stable build 5063
Your numbers are amazing, and far higher than mine or those of another
node I've been able to check. Is this a transient node?
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 05:00:41PM -, Kevin Bennett wrote:
Been running this for 20 hours now, and I have to say it rocks :)
Splitfiles in Frost and Fuqid are coming down at a rate of about 10k/s,
about 15-20x the rate they were coming down a week ago and DBR freesites
that were slow to arrive are now arriving usually within a few minutes.
If you want stats, here's a few that seem useful. If you want more,
just
ask as I don't know which are the most useful.
According to the connection manager page, in 20 hours it's transferred
1.1GB
up and 1.5GB down, way more than for the last few weeks (excepting the
brief
surge when 5054 was still small). Memory usage varies between
150-170MB,
CPU usage ~20% of an AMD 2500+.
Success probabilities are huge in comparison with previous builds:
Probability of success of an incoming request
21-Jan-2004 16:39:26
0 | 0.31746033
1 | 0.22285715
2 | 0.19723183
3 | 0.14285715
4 | 0.24358974
5 | 0.2173913
6 | 0.13824885
7 | 0.23214285
8 | 0.13261649
9 | 0.08004926
a | 0.07307172
b | 0.12169312
c | 0.26865673
d | 0.16981132
e | 0.26573426
f | 0.25
Max: 0.31746033
Most successful: 0
Last week these were all, without exception, 0.01.
inboundConnectionRatio is ~85%.
routingTime is ~17ms.
outputBytesTrailerChunks/outputBytes=0.58
Once again: nice job guys :)
Kevin.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Toad
Sent: 20 January 2004 19:56
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [freenet-support] Freenet stable build 5063
Freenet stable build 5063 is now available. {snip}
___
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.
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
