[freenet-support] Fwd: memory problem
-- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original message - From: Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: devl freenet devl@freenetproject.org Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 02:05:25 -0700 Subject: memory problem Where do I need to define memory constraints for the java executables as defined in flaunch.ini? Appending the constraints to JavaExec and JavaW in flaunch is not accepted. Basically I want freenet to use less memory, all the memory that it uses is not working in its favour. It results in trashing. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] capacity
It would be nice to be able to change the amount of capacity used without having to restart the node. Restarting just to increase the number of connections seems so radical. During day time I need capacity for other things, I don't mind if I have less than full capacity for other things but in 5102 they only way to achieve that is by restarting with 10 or 20 connections max. If I were able to claim back some capacity without having to restart the node I would let it run 24 hours a day. I hope to see something like this in a future version. Thanks -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] MIRC?
L.S., Yes, the label assigned by the software of the router to these translations is dependent on a port, so when the 6667 port is used the software of the router says something like 'this translation is for a MIRC type session'. Confusing, at least to me, and the software of the router seems to have it wrong. The problem of software is that it is soft. To build a hard defense in the end one needs hardware (like how Cops CopyLock II used a floppy long time ago). But that's a different story. Thanks all. On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:45:16 +0100, Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 04:05:40PM -0700, Maps Baps wrote: I take no offense in what you call pedantic but has it ever occurred to you that it is NAT that labels a session as MIRC when port 6667 is being used? I overlooked that and so I asked about it. Luckily someone knowledgeable answered my question and I am gratefull for that. Sorry, it is what that labels a session? It seems unlikely that mIRC needs a different NAT protocol handler to other IRC clients... Take care, P On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 09:27:32 +1200, Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On 26/04/05, Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any MIRC involved in freenet? I noticed the presence of MIRC like sessions sometime ago, just yet I looked again and found two machines that deviate from the normal freenet pattern. They both start normally as inbound connections but soon after these two show up in NAT as being connected with type MIRC. Can anyone tell me what is happening here? Can we _PLEASE_ drop that stupid M? The protocol is IRC, the client is mIRC. It's like saying you're recieving your Outlooks instead of emails. Sorry, being pedantic, but it really annoys me when people start using the wrong name. -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] (void) i/o ratio
Two things that I am still curious/want to know about are: 1) why do some nodes appear as (void) instead of as ip:port in the list of open connections, and 2) it seems whenever I start the node 95% or more of the available slots for connections are used by incoming connections, is there a way to define a ratio between the number of inbound and outbound connections so that it is like 50/50 or 30/70 for example? Thank you all -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] inbound/outbound ratio
L.S., If I just start the node and do nothing almost all connections become inbound in time. The connected nodes stay connected for hours. When I do browse a bit initially I see more outbound connections. When I do not browse a bit initially but later on I do not see more outbound connections being established slowing things down. Could it be that the 'stay connected'-like behavior limits thru put? Is there a way to control the ratio of inbound vs outbound connections and/or a way to control when inactive inbound connections are disconnected to make room for other nodes be it inbound or outbound? Maybe it's a stupid question but I am wondering about this. Regards -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] (void)???
Looking at the list of inbound connected peers I see some named '(void)'. It seems nodes can connect in that way. Is there a way to know the ip of these '(void)'s or a way to not accept them? I am getting a little paranoid here, not really, but still I wonder. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] MIRC?
Is there any MIRC involved in freenet? I noticed the presence of MIRC like sessions sometime ago, just yet I looked again and found two machines that deviate from the normal freenet pattern. They both start normally as inbound connections but soon after these two show up in NAT as being connected with type MIRC. Can anyone tell me what is happening here? -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
Fwd: [freenet-support] MIRC?
A small correction Whenever I start the node two things happen 1) 'something' attempts to initiate a mirc session with 82.249.55.118 (ip not listed anywhere in node status since I block this ip) 2) an outbound connection attempt is made to node 213.103.2.44 and listed as such (ip not listed elsewhere since I block this ip as well) Sofar these two IP are the only ones that showed up in NAT as being involved in a MIRC session. Since what happens differs from all the other nodes I block these two ip's but I would like to know what's happening. Thanks -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original message - From: Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: support@freenetproject.org Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 13:50:32 -0700 Subject: [freenet-support] MIRC? Is there any MIRC involved in freenet? I noticed the presence of MIRC like sessions sometime ago, just yet I looked again and found two machines that deviate from the normal freenet pattern. They both start normally as inbound connections but soon after these two show up in NAT as being connected with type MIRC. Can anyone tell me what is happening here? -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] ___ 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] MIRC?
Oh, I just send another email about this, but anyway, I understand what you mean and it makes sense but I was a bit confused. I will unblock them. Thanks. On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 22:18:26 +0100, Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: People are running Freenet on port 6667. On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 01:50:32PM -0700, Maps Baps wrote: Is there any MIRC involved in freenet? I noticed the presence of MIRC like sessions sometime ago, just yet I looked again and found two machines that deviate from the normal freenet pattern. They both start normally as inbound connections but soon after these two show up in NAT as being connected with type MIRC. Can anyone tell me what is happening here? -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] MIRC?
I take no offense in what you call pedantic but has it ever occurred to you that it is NAT that labels a session as MIRC when port 6667 is being used? I overlooked that and so I asked about it. Luckily someone knowledgeable answered my question and I am gratefull for that. Take care, P On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 09:27:32 +1200, Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On 26/04/05, Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any MIRC involved in freenet? I noticed the presence of MIRC like sessions sometime ago, just yet I looked again and found two machines that deviate from the normal freenet pattern. They both start normally as inbound connections but soon after these two show up in NAT as being connected with type MIRC. Can anyone tell me what is happening here? Can we _PLEASE_ drop that stupid M? The protocol is IRC, the client is mIRC. It's like saying you're recieving your Outlooks instead of emails. Sorry, being pedantic, but it really annoys me when people start using the wrong name. -- Phillip Hutchings http://www.sitharus.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
Fwd: Re: [freenet-support] Fwd: superfluous SYN after exit node
It all runs fine, no problem, but I block nodes sending ICMP traffic. Not all of them send ICMP traffic though. I see no reason why some do send ICMP and it limits the 'network' because I block these. I ACK SYN and that should be sufficient, shouldn't it? Is this version related? Is it the os below freenet they are running that sends ICMP? I don't understand. Could someone give me some information on this? When I stop the node, as I said, SYN keeps coming, I do not see what possibly changed addresses have to do with this. When a SYN is ACKed the node just isn't there. When it is there it will tell the medium that should in turn propagate the presence of the node and its willingness to accept incoming connections. But then again, all this is just my curiosity, I always wonder when I see something that I do not understand and for which I cannot find a logical explanation. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original message - From: Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: support@freenetproject.org Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:14:05 +0100 Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Fwd: superfluous SYN after exit node They keep trying - intentionally. Because one or other side may have changed its address. On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 11:01:55AM -0700, Maps Baps wrote: L.S., Some more on this, the nodes keep trying to connect the whole other 12 hours long. Shouldn't they give up after some unsuccesfull attempts until they are notified the node is on again? Maybe I am just asking a stupid question and the behaviour observed is by design but neverteless, can someone confirm the behaviour I see is correct and inline with the intended behaviour? T.I.A. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original message - From: Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: support@freenetproject.org Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 01:35:43 -0700 Subject: superfluous SYN after exit node L.S., I run the node say 12 hours a day. When I stop the node and close the gates I see SYNs coming in that are not ACKed. I notice that it takes at least an hour before other nodes give up. It doesn't bother me but I would expect that they would give up sooner when the node I run exits. Their SYN packets are at least wasting some capacity without reason I think. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. ___ 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] signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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]
Fwd: Re: [freenet-support] Fwd: superfluous SYN after exit node
L.S., It's allright with me but I wonder when they stop their connect attempts. They do stop after some time but what determines how long that takes? I have not seen them stopping their attempts though but that is because I only monitored about 9 consecutive hours with the node down, all this time SYN were targeting the listenPort but I did not send any ACK so these SYN packets ended up in cyberheaven somewhere. This is not about a problem, it is just my curiosity about when the other nodes stop sending SYN. So let that be my question, If node X goes down and stops responding to SYN, what makes other nodes stop sending SYN to node X? T.I.A. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original message - From: Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: support@freenetproject.org Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:14:05 +0100 Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Fwd: superfluous SYN after exit node They keep trying - intentionally. Because one or other side may have changed its address. On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 11:01:55AM -0700, Maps Baps wrote: L.S., Some more on this, the nodes keep trying to connect the whole other 12 hours long. Shouldn't they give up after some unsuccesfull attempts until they are notified the node is on again? Maybe I am just asking a stupid question and the behaviour observed is by design but neverteless, can someone confirm the behaviour I see is correct and inline with the intended behaviour? T.I.A. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original message - From: Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: support@freenetproject.org Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 01:35:43 -0700 Subject: superfluous SYN after exit node L.S., I run the node say 12 hours a day. When I stop the node and close the gates I see SYNs coming in that are not ACKed. I notice that it takes at least an hour before other nodes give up. It doesn't bother me but I would expect that they would give up sooner when the node I run exits. Their SYN packets are at least wasting some capacity without reason I think. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. ___ 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] signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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]
[freenet-support] superfluous SYN after exit node
L.S., I run the node say 12 hours a day. When I stop the node and close the gates I see SYNs coming in that are not ACKed. I notice that it takes at least an hour before other nodes give up. It doesn't bother me but I would expect that they would give up sooner when the node I run exits. Their SYN packets are at least wasting some capacity without reason I think. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] Fwd: superfluous SYN after exit node
L.S., Some more on this, the nodes keep trying to connect the whole other 12 hours long. Shouldn't they give up after some unsuccesfull attempts until they are notified the node is on again? Maybe I am just asking a stupid question and the behaviour observed is by design but neverteless, can someone confirm the behaviour I see is correct and inline with the intended behaviour? T.I.A. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original message - From: Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: support@freenetproject.org Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 01:35:43 -0700 Subject: superfluous SYN after exit node L.S., I run the node say 12 hours a day. When I stop the node and close the gates I see SYNs coming in that are not ACKed. I notice that it takes at least an hour before other nodes give up. It doesn't bother me but I would expect that they would give up sooner when the node I run exits. Their SYN packets are at least wasting some capacity without reason I think. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] listenPort?
Sorry for the trouble, it was my mistake and only firewall/nat related. Thanks, it is up and running properly now and has a big dedicated disk backing it. On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:13:01 +0100, Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: ___ 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] -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
Fwd: Re: [freenet-support] listenPort?
Back again, it's been running for several hours in a row now and has transferred over 200 MB so it does something, that's ok. When I look at http://127.0.0.1:/servlet/nodestatus/ocmContents.html (Connections) I see Connections open (Inbound/Outbound/Limit) 49 (24/25/200) Transfers active (Transmitting/Receiving) 69 (34/35) Data waiting to be transferred 2,389 Bytes Total amount of data transferred226 MiB Number of requests (sent/received) 29574/24727 And the following 4 request types outbound idle, outbound transmitting data, inbound idle and inbound transmitting data. Shouldn't I also see the following 4 request types? inbound receiving data, inbound receiving and transmitting data, inbound receiving data and inbound receiving and transmitting data I am just wondering whether that is an indication of something wrong. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original message - From: Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: support@freenetproject.org Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 04:53:41 -0700 Subject: Re: [freenet-support] listenPort? Sorry for the trouble, it was my mistake and only firewall/nat related. Thanks, it is up and running properly now and has a big dedicated disk backing it. On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:13:01 +0100, Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: ___ 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] -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] listenPort?
L.S., The node runs but I see no incoming connections. Incoming TCP packets to the listenPort are allowed properly but I see TCP packets coming in on another port and those packets are blocked, there are no packets coming in to the listenPort. The other packets arrive when the node is running. What are these other packets? They address another port. Also, could it be that I should wait some days for connection attempts addressing the proper port? T.I.A. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] tcp only?
L.S., Is it sufficient to allow incoming tcp on the port mentioned in the config file for a node to become fully operational? T.I.A. -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] error, fyi
A lot of these in 'recent logs': 23:13:17 Please close() me manually in finalizer: Key: 89f440868056e7cc0f36d93e9da00d9637d708190f0203 Buffer: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:0x1 : 89f440868056e7cc0f36d93e9da00d9637d708190f0203:temp:2165:f3815d10d7a535c3 New: true ( 0 of 1025 read) java.lang.IllegalStateException: unclosed -- Maps Baps [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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]
[freenet-support] is node functioning properly?
Just installed it and now I would like to know whether it is set up correctly. Is there a way to find out whether the node is functioning properly? It takes a long time to have the initial pages completed in the browser. It seems that the current page does not have priority above other things the node does. Is that correct? ___ 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]
