On Friday 21 January 2011 19:32:15 Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 08:22:13 +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote:
So, the question then becomes, when the node is clearly receiving
more packets than it's supposed to, why is it taking so long (many
minutes
-- I never actually waited
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 08:06:28 +0300, Volodya wrote:
Please describe the formula through which to calculate the speed of
the data that you need to send to your peer, which has 19 other
peers (and you have no knowledge about the speed with which they
are transmitting).
Simple:
for i
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 10:55:40 -0500, Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 08:06:28 +0300, Volodya wrote:
Please describe the formula through which to calculate the speed
of the data that you need to send to your peer, which has 19
other peers (and you have no knowledge about the speed
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 05:59:06 +0100, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
On Thursday 20 January 2011 20:32:30 Dennis Nezic wrote:
Fix!
Please refrain from bossing us around. You are not in a position
to do that.
Please refrain from mis-interpreting my words. (There is such a
thing as
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 05:59:06 +0100, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
a “simple thing” like bandwidth limiting
Can someone explain why bandwidth limiting might not be such a simple
thing? Volodya tried, with his massive-incoming-packet theory
(40KiB :p), but that's not true -- freenet packets are about
On 22/01/2011, at 7:21 AM, Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 05:59:06 +0100, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
a “simple thing” like bandwidth limiting
Can someone explain why bandwidth limiting might not be such a simple
thing? Volodya tried, with his massive-incoming-packet theory
(40KiB
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 07:26:56 +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote:
On 22/01/2011, at 7:21 AM, Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 05:59:06 +0100, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
a “simple thing” like bandwidth limiting
Can someone explain why bandwidth limiting might not be such a
simple
On 22/01/2011, at 7:34 AM, Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 07:26:56 +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote:
On 22/01/2011, at 7:21 AM, Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 05:59:06 +0100, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
a “simple thing” like bandwidth limiting
Can someone explain why
So, the question then becomes, when the node is clearly receiving more
packets than it's supposed to, why is it taking so long (many minutes
-- I never actually waited to see if the flood, which consumed my
entire connection's 80KiB/sec capacity, would eventually subside) for
the rate to
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 08:22:13 +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote:
So, the question then becomes, when the node is clearly receiving
more packets than it's supposed to, why is it taking so long (many
minutes
-- I never actually waited to see if the flood, which consumed my
entire connection's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/21/2011 10:32 PM, Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 08:22:13 +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote:
So, the question then becomes, when the node is clearly receiving
more packets than it's supposed to, why is it taking so long (many
minutes
So let me see if I understand.
It's a breeze to get my firewall to accept incoming TCP packets from A
or from B. But there are special routing permissions necessary to
forward packets from A to B or from B to A, and it would be a nightmare
to keep routing tables straight?
Speaking of
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:18:33 +0300, Volodya wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/21/2011 10:32 PM, Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 08:22:13 +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote:
So, the question then becomes, when the node is clearly receiving
more packets than
On 01/21/2011 02:34 PM, Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:18:33 +0300, Volodya wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/21/2011 10:32 PM, Dennis Nezic wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 08:22:13 +1300, Phillip Hutchings wrote:
So, the question then becomes, when the node
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Please describe the formula through which to calculate the speed of
the data that you need to send to your peer, which has 19 other peers
(and you have no knowledge about the speed with which they are
transmitting).
Simple:
for i in
Freenet 0.7.5 build 1334 is now available. It may fix some recent problems
(particularly bwlimitDelayTime problems). Please upgrade!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Support mailing list
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:48:56 +, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Freenet 0.7.5 build 1334 is now available. It may fix some recent
problems (particularly bwlimitDelayTime problems). Please upgrade!
Same problem as I originally reported a while ago. Input bandwidth
limit is trivially broken. So, like
On Thursday 20 January 2011 18:24:15 Dennis Nezic wrote:
Fix!
Please refrain from bossing us around. You are not in a position to do that.
David
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Support mailing list
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:28:24 +0100, David ‘Bombe’ Roden wrote:
On Thursday 20 January 2011 18:24:15 Dennis Nezic wrote:
Fix!
Please refrain from bossing us around. You are not in a position to
do that.
Please refrain from mis-interpreting my words. (There is such a thing
as
On Thursday 20 January 2011 20:32:30 Dennis Nezic wrote:
Fix!
Please refrain from bossing us around. You are not in a position to
do that.
Please refrain from mis-interpreting my words. (There is such a thing
as 'c-o-n-t-e-x-t', eh?) (Perhaps acquire a sense of humor while you're
at
20 matches
Mail list logo
