Re: [freenet-support] voip support
Diaa Elsayed: > Greetings, > > Does freenet support voip, like skype? Well it does not support streaming, so VoIP would be very hard to implement. Especially you could trace ppl since there a data flow between a <-> b. I belief this is a thing freenet wants to avoid Ciao Jens Skripczynski -- E-Mail: skripczynski(at)mail2003(dot)skripczynski(dot)de Life is like a dogsled team; if you ain't the lead dog, the scenery never changes. -- Lewis Grizzard ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] network speed
Niklas Bergh:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens
> > Skripczynski
> > Sent: den 17 december 2003 13:35
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [freenet-support] network speed
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I wanted to as a question about network speed in general.
> >
> > How effektive does freenet use the total bandwidth assigned
> > to it ? (e.g. compared to http over TCP/IP). TCP/IP has an
> > overhead of about 10% and give http another 10%, leaving a
> > total bandwidth of approx. 80% for Data connections ([1]).
>
> Freenet doesn't use HTTP between nodes.
Yeah, I know. I wanted to compare a 'normal' TCP/IP connection
with a 'normal' Protocoll ('http' - could have been FTP, edonk...)
with the freenet protocoll.
With my assumptions I have calculated a percentage, that is lost
by using http over tcp/ip compared to the total bandwidth.
And got that I can use 80%, thus loose 20% to routing, commands
-- overhead.
Next I tried to do the same with freenet, with the knowledge I have
about it.
Since I (and the others) do not have a direct connection to the host,
they must use the bandwidth of the other freenet users. Thus the ratio
compared to the http over tcp/ip must be much less. Because if I use
bandwidth from others, they will use mine, too - And most of the time
at the same ratio.
So now I tried to figure out, how much band-width is lost and got with my
assumptions something around 20% - where you say I'm wrong.
Has somebody done a calculation - experiment figuring out, how good the
actual routing is (like take a netto traffic of 5 MB data and calculate the
brutto amount of data for routing) - next calculate how much bandwidth it
consumes for each node, the calculate the percentage between the total
bandwidth and the netto Bandwidth for data.
Have you a better assumption for freenet ? It is very hard to make an
assumtion from 'varies very much'. Varies very much with an average of 7 hops
is more helpfull...
Ciao
Jens Skripczynski
--
E-Mail: skripczynski(at)mail2003(dot)skripczynski(dot)de
Computers are like airconditioners: They stop working
properly if you open windows.
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
[freenet-support] network speed
Hi, I wanted to as a question about network speed in general. How effektive does freenet use the total bandwidth assigned to it ? (e.g. compared to http over TCP/IP). TCP/IP has an overhead of about 10% and give http another 10%, leaving a total bandwidth of approx. 80% for Data connections ([1]). Next freenet. AFAIK all packets my freenet server sends have to pass a fixed number of other nodes (chosen random), before reaching their destiny. AFAIK n is 5 by now. Also freenet has its own overhead, with routing, searching,... say 20%. So lets say I have a total bandwidth of 120kB (6 is a divisor) then I have my bandwith and the bandwidth of 5 other computers I have to route, thus having a new bandwidth of 20kB that I can assume to be my own. -20% leaves me about 16kB. 16/120 = 13 1/3 %. Could somebody please verify my calculation / assumption ? Is it really that I have to sacrifice more than 85% of my band-width for being somewhat in a state of privacy ? [1] This is some assumption. It neglects compression in the http protocoll and others. Ciao Jens Skripczynski -- E-Mail: skripczynski(at)mail2003(dot)skripczynski(dot)de Computers are like airconditioners: They stop working properly if you open windows. ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet Stable Build 5036
Toad: > Freenet stable build 5036 is now available. If you are running the > stable branch (i.e. unless you know what you are doing), please upgrade. > You can use the update.sh script on *nix, or the freenet-webinstall.exe > on Windows, to upgrade. Or you can fetch the jar from > http://freenetproject.org/snapshots/freenet-latest.jar . > > Major changes (since 5034): > * Fix a major bug in 5034: we weren't taking into account the > probability of the transfer failing, it was accidentally deleted. > * Reinstate bandwidth usage based query rejection. This should increase > transfer rates, reduce the number of connections transferring at once, > and reduce transfer failure rates. The last update was a bit too fast, i think. The built numbers do not seem to me too usefull. How about releasing things with some freenet-version--pre(1-5) and freenet-version ? Where can I get older builds ? I'm able to locate unstable-date (where i think unstable-builtnumber) is more usefull, since the Date associated with the jar file tells about the release day # addign further description to fproxy peer servlet - For me (and I think for others) it might be usefull to see which numbers are good, or bad. e.g. for time i belief smaller is bettern, so it would be great if somthing like a arrow would point to the better performance. | lookup time 0 10 << better -- host1 | host2 | ### host3 | Thus host 2 does perform well. # adding general information to fproxy servlet - Like: versionnumber, amount and perentage of the connected hosts version | # host | % 5029| 10 | 50 5036| 5 | 25 6031| 3 | 15 6033| 2 | 10 Packet input/output, Waiting input output, total load over time statistic (a nice picture :) So one can see, if one's node stays on overload over time (90-100% load). If routing improves (packet output,...). Ciao Jens Skripczynski -- E-Mail: skripczynski(at)mail2003(dot)skripczynski(dot)de The Golden Rule of Arts and Sciences: He who has the gold makes the rules. ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet Stable Build 5032
Hi, good job ! These releases give me a feeling something is working and it is communicated to the community interested in the information. Toad: > Freenet stable build 5032 is now available. Use your update utility to > upgrade (freenet-webinstall.exe or update.sh depending on platform). It > is also available from > http://freenetproject.org/snapshots/freenet-latest.jar (stop your node, > install this over your current freenet.jar, start your node). > Changes: > * LOTS OF BUG FIXES, in fairly important areas. Examples: > - Estimates of transfer rates could be ludicrously high. > - The global success time estimator wasn't (wasn't always?) written out > on Windows, leading to bad routing on startup. > - Don't drop our best nodes while restarting because they aren't > connected yet, if they have recent successes. > - Fix announcements to nodes not in the routing table or otherwise > connected. > - Fix bug in padding a trailer out when we abort it, may have caused > connections to be closed for no good reason. > - Some NullPointerExceptions. > * Major changes to the failure table (system that tries to reduce load > from retries of recently failed keys) > - Fixed architectural bugs, should increase effectiveness. > - Implement "secondary failure table", which has been described > recently, to improve accuracy of estimators and statistics using an > extension to the failure table. > * Various new diagnostic variables: outputBytesTrailingAttempted, > searchFailedCount, diffSuccessSearchTime, absDiffSuccessSearchTime, > diffTransferRate, absDiffTransferRate, routingSuccessRatioCHK. All are > documented on the Diagnostics page in the node status servlet. > * Major changes to the Open Connections page, Peers mode is now default, > and is extremely verbose. > * Show an estimate of nodes' max and min estimated transfer rates on the > routing table summary page. > * Internal code improvements, improved logging etc. > -- > 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://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Ciao Jens Skripczynski -- E-Mail: skripczynski(at)mail2003(dot)skripczynski(dot)de Today is yesterday's pupil. -- Thomas Fuller ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
