Re: [freenet-support] Update links on wiki.freenetproject.org?

[Steve Dougherty]

On 10/17/2015 09:54 AM, Xue Fuqiao wrote:
> Hi list,
> 
> It seems that public account creation on wiki.freenetproject.org is
> disabled.  Is there any other way to edit the wiki?  I'd like to update
> a few links, specifically:
> 
> On https://wiki.freenetproject.org/Distro_packages, update the links for
> Arch and Gentoo Linux.
> 
> TIA

As the prompt says, "please contact us to create an account." I'll bring
this off-list.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

[freenet-support] Update links on wiki.freenetproject.org?

[Xue Fuqiao]

Hi list,

It seems that public account creation on wiki.freenetproject.org is
disabled.  Is there any other way to edit the wiki?  I'd like to update
a few links, specifically:

On https://wiki.freenetproject.org/Distro_packages, update the links for
Arch and Gentoo Linux.

TIA
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

[freenet-support] Update to 1403 on Mac

[mcharters10]

Apparently Freenet has graduated to malware, according to Apple, see below. 




Having difficulty updating to 1403, help greatly appreciated. 




In Terminal received following messages: 




Intel-Desk:~ curio$ sh /Volumes/Archive\ II/update.sh 

Updating freenet Created temporary download directory. 

sha1test.jar needs to be updated 

Downloading sha1test.jar utility jar which will download the actual update. 

% Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current 

Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed 

101 6595 101 6595 0 0 23 0 0:04:46 0:04:35 0:00:11 1538 

Importing startssl.pem into 

/var/folders/Pm/Pm14-jo0H0KSztxUHvQ4tE+++TI/-Tmp-/keystore1395132370409073510.tmp
 

The CA has been imported into the trustStore 

Fetching update.sh https://checksums.freenetproject.org/latest/update.sh.sha1 

An SSL exception has occured:Remote host closed connection during handshake 

Could not download new update.sh. 

Intel-Desk:~ curio$ 




Console shows: 




9/9/11 11:50:16 AM com.apple.launchd.peruser.501[162] 
([0x0-0x14014].com.apple.Terminal[221]) Exited: Terminated 

9/9/11 12:50:30 PM com.apple.launchd[1] (com.apple.xprotectupdater[4095]) 
Exited with exit code: 255 

9/9/11 12:52:48 PM System Preferences[4110] Could not connect the action 
resetLocationWarningsSheetOk: to target of class AppleSecurity_Pref 

9/9/11 12:52:48 PM System Preferences[4110] Could not connect the action 
resetLocationWarningsSheetCancel: to target of class AppleSecurity_Pref 

9/9/11 12:58:36 PM com.apple.launchd[1] (com.apple.xprotectupdater[4152]) 
Exited with exit code: 255 




Auto update on Freenet 0.7.5 Build #1401 build01401 

Freenet-ext Build #29 rv29 

Does not work either. 




using MacOS 10.6.8 




Curio 
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [freenet-support] Update button /not/ updating Freenet

[Jep]

Jep:
Since I am not to keen on updating immediately, FN has been displaying 
the message it has downloadeded version 1329 for days on end.


Because 1329 will be mandatory tomorrow, I've just now used the update 
button.

It restarted in the old version 1323 telling me:

It seems that your node isn't running the latest version of the 
software. Your node is currently downloading a new version of Freenet 
(node version 1329).Would you like Freenet to automatically restart as 
soon as it has downloaded the update?


New button: 'update asap', and after a while it changed in 'update now'.

Pressing that button resulted in another restart.. in version 1323. 
Button 'update asap'.


Update.cmd did its work and let me start #1329- which did not connect.
Restart of FN; no connection.
BTW: on pressing 'shut down Freenet', I get a system warning 'the 
Freenet wrapper terminated unexpectedly'.


Deleted nodedb4o and everything with the port numbers in its name, 
restarted FN; now it connected.




___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

[freenet-support] Update button /not/ updating Freenet

[Jep]

Since I am not to keen on updating immediately, FN has been displaying 
the message it has downloadeded version 1329 for days on end.


Because 1329 will be mandatory tomorrow, I've just now used the update 
button.

It restarted in the old version 1323 telling me:

It seems that your node isn't running the latest version of the 
software. Your node is currently downloading a new version of Freenet 
(node version 1329).Would you like Freenet to automatically restart as 
soon as it has downloaded the update?


New button: 'update asap', and after a while it changed in 'update now'.

Pressing that button resulted in another restart.. in version 1323. 
Button 'update asap'.



___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 06 May 2008 22:20, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 09:17 AM 5/6/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> >* PGP Signed by an unknown key
> >
> >On Tuesday 06 May 2008 01:41, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > At 01:50 PM 5/5/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > > > After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs
> > > > > just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However,
> > > > > when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the
> > > > > node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old
> > > > > machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed
> > > > > out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and
> > > > > UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet 
drops
> > > > > connections before the system frees up.
> > > >
> > > >Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority 
from
> > > >BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only 
threads
> > > >which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of 
the
> > > >time this shouldn't impact on system performance...
> > > >
> > > >See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337
> > >
> > > I've increased its base priority to NORMAL.
> >
> >The above happened before this change?
> 
> Yes, it did.  And I've realized that setting Freenet's priority to 
> NORMAL in Process Explorer didn't persist, so I need to figure our 
> how to make it so.

In wrapper.conf.
> 
> > > > > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it
> > > > > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > > > > services manager, it connects immediately.
> > > >
> > > >That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> > >
> > > Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol
> > > not allowed".
> >
> >Because of IPv6? That's not related. Are you sure it tries to reseed? Does 
it
> >show the announcing alert on the homepage? What does it say in the
> >wrapper.log?
> 
> On the homepage, it said that it was trying to connect, and that it 
> would be slow for a while.  I've e-mailed you the relevant part of 
> the wrapper.log.

What if you click on the alert? Show me the details.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 09:19 PM 5/6/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:



> > ... And I've realized that setting Freenet's priority to
> > NORMAL in Process Explorer didn't persist, so I need to figure our
> > how to make it so.
>
>In wrapper.conf.

Doh.  Thanks.

> > > > > > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I 
> find that it
> > > > > > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > > > > > services manager, it connects immediately.
> > > > >
> > > > >That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol
> > > > not allowed".
> > >
> > >Because of IPv6? That's not related. Are you sure it tries to 
> reseed? Does
>it
> > >show the announcing alert on the homepage? What does it say in the
> > >wrapper.log?
> >
> > On the homepage, it said that it was trying to connect, and that it
> > would be slow for a while.  I've e-mailed you the relevant part of
> > the wrapper.log.
>
>What if you click on the alert? Show me the details.

OK, the next time it happens, I'll reply again with the details.



=
Jim Cook  

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 09:19 PM 5/6/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:



> > ... And I've realized that setting Freenet's priority to
> > NORMAL in Process Explorer didn't persist, so I need to figure our
> > how to make it so.
>
>In wrapper.conf.

Doh.  Thanks.

> > > > > > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I 
> find that it
> > > > > > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > > > > > services manager, it connects immediately.
> > > > >
> > > > >That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol
> > > > not allowed".
> > >
> > >Because of IPv6? That's not related. Are you sure it tries to 
> reseed? Does
>it
> > >show the announcing alert on the homepage? What does it say in the
> > >wrapper.log?
> >
> > On the homepage, it said that it was trying to connect, and that it
> > would be slow for a while.  I've e-mailed you the relevant part of
> > the wrapper.log.
>
>What if you click on the alert? Show me the details.

OK, the next time it happens, I'll reply again with the details.



=
Jim Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 


___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 06 May 2008 22:20, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 09:17 AM 5/6/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> >* PGP Signed by an unknown key
> >
> >On Tuesday 06 May 2008 01:41, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > At 01:50 PM 5/5/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > > > After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs
> > > > > just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However,
> > > > > when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the
> > > > > node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old
> > > > > machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed
> > > > > out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and
> > > > > UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet 
drops
> > > > > connections before the system frees up.
> > > >
> > > >Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority 
from
> > > >BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only 
threads
> > > >which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of 
the
> > > >time this shouldn't impact on system performance...
> > > >
> > > >See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337
> > >
> > > I've increased its base priority to NORMAL.
> >
> >The above happened before this change?
> 
> Yes, it did.  And I've realized that setting Freenet's priority to 
> NORMAL in Process Explorer didn't persist, so I need to figure our 
> how to make it so.

In wrapper.conf.
> 
> > > > > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it
> > > > > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > > > > services manager, it connects immediately.
> > > >
> > > >That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> > >
> > > Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol
> > > not allowed".
> >
> >Because of IPv6? That's not related. Are you sure it tries to reseed? Does 
it
> >show the announcing alert on the homepage? What does it say in the
> >wrapper.log?
> 
> On the homepage, it said that it was trying to connect, and that it 
> would be slow for a while.  I've e-mailed you the relevant part of 
> the wrapper.log.

What if you click on the alert? Show me the details.


pgpWyFBpjrFpI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 09:17 AM 5/6/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:

>* PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
>On Tuesday 06 May 2008 01:41, Jim Cook wrote:
> > At 01:50 PM 5/5/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> >
> > 
> >
> > > > After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs
> > > > just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However,
> > > > when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the
> > > > node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old
> > > > machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed
> > > > out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and
> > > > UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops
> > > > connections before the system frees up.
> > >
> > >Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority from
> > >BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only threads
> > >which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of the
> > >time this shouldn't impact on system performance...
> > >
> > >See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337
> >
> > I've increased its base priority to NORMAL.
>
>The above happened before this change?

Yes, it did.  And I've realized that setting Freenet's priority to 
NORMAL in Process Explorer didn't persist, so I need to figure our 
how to make it so.

> > > > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it
> > > > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > > > services manager, it connects immediately.
> > >
> > >That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> >
> > Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol
> > not allowed".
>
>Because of IPv6? That's not related. Are you sure it tries to reseed? Does it
>show the announcing alert on the homepage? What does it say in the
>wrapper.log?

On the homepage, it said that it was trying to connect, and that it 
would be slow for a while.  I've e-mailed you the relevant part of 
the wrapper.log.



=
Jim Cook  

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 09:17 AM 5/6/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:

>* PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
>On Tuesday 06 May 2008 01:41, Jim Cook wrote:
> > At 01:50 PM 5/5/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> >
> > 
> >
> > > > After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs
> > > > just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However,
> > > > when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the
> > > > node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old
> > > > machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed
> > > > out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and
> > > > UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops
> > > > connections before the system frees up.
> > >
> > >Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority from
> > >BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only threads
> > >which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of the
> > >time this shouldn't impact on system performance...
> > >
> > >See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337
> >
> > I've increased its base priority to NORMAL.
>
>The above happened before this change?

Yes, it did.  And I've realized that setting Freenet's priority to 
NORMAL in Process Explorer didn't persist, so I need to figure our 
how to make it so.

> > > > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it
> > > > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > > > services manager, it connects immediately.
> > >
> > >That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> >
> > Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol
> > not allowed".
>
>Because of IPv6? That's not related. Are you sure it tries to reseed? Does it
>show the announcing alert on the homepage? What does it say in the
>wrapper.log?

On the homepage, it said that it was trying to connect, and that it 
would be slow for a while.  I've e-mailed you the relevant part of 
the wrapper.log.



=
Jim Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 


___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 06 May 2008 01:41, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 01:50 PM 5/5/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > > After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs
> > > just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However,
> > > when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the
> > > node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old
> > > machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed
> > > out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and
> > > UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops
> > > connections before the system frees up.
> >
> >Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority from
> >BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only threads
> >which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of the
> >time this shouldn't impact on system performance...
> >
> >See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337
> 
> I've increased its base priority to NORMAL.

The above happened before this change?
> 
> > > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it
> > > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > > services manager, it connects immediately.
> >
> >That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> 
> Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol 
> not allowed".

Because of IPv6? That's not related. Are you sure it tries to reseed? Does it 
show the announcing alert on the homepage? What does it say in the 
wrapper.log?
> 
> After stopping the node and restarting, it adds its first peer within 
> two minutes, has five by four minutes, and rapidly connects to ca. 20.
> 
> > > Is that behavior normal?
> >
> >No, it may be a bug.
> 
> I wasn't keeping enough logs to span the last logoff/logon, but I saw 
> the same behavior after the update to Build #1145.  Within a few 
> hours after the update, the node dropped all connections, and 
> wouldn't reconnect until I stopped and restarted.  I'll e-mail log 
> excerpts off list.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 06 May 2008 01:41, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 01:50 PM 5/5/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > > After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs
> > > just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However,
> > > when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the
> > > node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old
> > > machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed
> > > out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and
> > > UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops
> > > connections before the system frees up.
> >
> >Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority from
> >BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only threads
> >which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of the
> >time this shouldn't impact on system performance...
> >
> >See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337
> 
> I've increased its base priority to NORMAL.

The above happened before this change?
> 
> > > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it
> > > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > > services manager, it connects immediately.
> >
> >That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> 
> Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol 
> not allowed".

Because of IPv6? That's not related. Are you sure it tries to reseed? Does it 
show the announcing alert on the homepage? What does it say in the 
wrapper.log?
> 
> After stopping the node and restarting, it adds its first peer within 
> two minutes, has five by four minutes, and rapidly connects to ca. 20.
> 
> > > Is that behavior normal?
> >
> >No, it may be a bug.
> 
> I wasn't keeping enough logs to span the last logoff/logon, but I saw 
> the same behavior after the update to Build #1145.  Within a few 
> hours after the update, the node dropped all connections, and 
> wouldn't reconnect until I stopped and restarted.  I'll e-mail log 
> excerpts off list.


pgpwBtFT3agPL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 01:50 PM 5/5/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:



> > After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs
> > just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However,
> > when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the
> > node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old
> > machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed
> > out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and
> > UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops
> > connections before the system frees up.
>
>Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority from
>BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only threads
>which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of the
>time this shouldn't impact on system performance...
>
>See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337

I've increased its base priority to NORMAL.

> > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it
> > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > services manager, it connects immediately.
>
>That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?

Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol 
not allowed".

After stopping the node and restarting, it adds its first peer within 
two minutes, has five by four minutes, and rapidly connects to ca. 20.

> > Is that behavior normal?
>
>No, it may be a bug.

I wasn't keeping enough logs to span the last logoff/logon, but I saw 
the same behavior after the update to Build #1145.  Within a few 
hours after the update, the node dropped all connections, and 
wouldn't reconnect until I stopped and restarted.  I'll e-mail log 
excerpts off list.



=
Jim Cook  

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Sunday 04 May 2008 21:15, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 12:43 PM 5/3/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > > My node's been up continuously now for about three days, with ca. 20
> > > peers, 25.1 KiB/sec average input rate, 27.1 KiB/sec average output
> > > rate (of 50.0 KiB/sec) and 13.9 KiB/sec average payload output rate
> > > (51%).  Is that reasonable?
> >
> >With 20 connected/backed off peers? It's a bit low, mine's been a bit low
> >lately too though...
> 
> I've only provided the default 128M wrapper memory.  Could that be a 
> factor?  Are there other config settings that might be limiting throughput?

Perhaps. Mostly memory is used by the queue (and to a lesser extent the 
datastore database backend).
> 
> > > However, in order to achieve that, I've had to stay logged on Win
> > > NT.  If I log off while sleeping or away, which has been my practice,
> > > Freenet appears to keep running (based on network activity) for a
> > > while.  However, when I log on the next day, I find that the node
> > > isn't connected to any peers, and also that it won't connect until I
> > > stop and restart it.
> >
> >That is really bizarre. File a bug on https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ .
> >Include wrapper.log and any ERRORs in logs/ ...
> 
> After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs 
> just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However, 
> when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the 
> node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old 
> machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed 
> out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and 
> UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops 
> connections before the system frees up.

Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority from 
BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only threads 
which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of the 
time this shouldn't impact on system performance...

See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337
> 
> Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it 
> hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP 
> services manager, it connects immediately.

That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> 
> Is that behavior normal?

No, it may be a bug.
> 
> > > Freenet runs as user ".\freenet", and I get that y'all switched from
> > > running as LocalSystem to improve security
> >.
> >
> >Yes.
> >
> > > Am I correct in
> > > guessing that ".\freenet" is linked to my user account, and so the
> > > Freenet service hangs after I log off?
> >
> >No, it's a separate user.
> >
> > > Could Freenet run safely as
> > > LocalService or NetworkService?
> >
> >No idea. Probably. Would it be better?
> 
> I have no clue.  On my Win XP system now, Freenet is the only service 
> running as a non-standard user.  Most services are running as 
> LocalSystem, and the rest are running as LocalService or 
> NetworkService.  I gather that LocalService and NetworkService have 
> restricted permissions, apparently more-or-less comparable to default 
> non-admin users.  But I've never needed to mess with that stuff, so I 
> don't know it.  And it seems to be OK as is, so I won't mess with it.

We could do that. I dunno if it would be better, the current way may be better 
although it's not what other apps do...

https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2336
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 01:50 PM 5/5/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:



> > After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs
> > just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However,
> > when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the
> > node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old
> > machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed
> > out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and
> > UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops
> > connections before the system frees up.
>
>Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority from
>BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only threads
>which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of the
>time this shouldn't impact on system performance...
>
>See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337

I've increased its base priority to NORMAL.

> > Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it
> > hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP
> > services manager, it connects immediately.
>
>That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?

Yes, it keeps trying, but reports "java.net.SocketException: Protocol 
not allowed".

After stopping the node and restarting, it adds its first peer within 
two minutes, has five by four minutes, and rapidly connects to ca. 20.

> > Is that behavior normal?
>
>No, it may be a bug.

I wasn't keeping enough logs to span the last logoff/logon, but I saw 
the same behavior after the update to Build #1145.  Within a few 
hours after the update, the node dropped all connections, and 
wouldn't reconnect until I stopped and restarted.  I'll e-mail log 
excerpts off list.



=
Jim Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 


___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Sunday 04 May 2008 21:15, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 12:43 PM 5/3/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > > My node's been up continuously now for about three days, with ca. 20
> > > peers, 25.1 KiB/sec average input rate, 27.1 KiB/sec average output
> > > rate (of 50.0 KiB/sec) and 13.9 KiB/sec average payload output rate
> > > (51%).  Is that reasonable?
> >
> >With 20 connected/backed off peers? It's a bit low, mine's been a bit low
> >lately too though...
> 
> I've only provided the default 128M wrapper memory.  Could that be a 
> factor?  Are there other config settings that might be limiting throughput?

Perhaps. Mostly memory is used by the queue (and to a lesser extent the 
datastore database backend).
> 
> > > However, in order to achieve that, I've had to stay logged on Win
> > > NT.  If I log off while sleeping or away, which has been my practice,
> > > Freenet appears to keep running (based on network activity) for a
> > > while.  However, when I log on the next day, I find that the node
> > > isn't connected to any peers, and also that it won't connect until I
> > > stop and restart it.
> >
> >That is really bizarre. File a bug on https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ .
> >Include wrapper.log and any ERRORs in logs/ ...
> 
> After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs 
> just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However, 
> when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the 
> node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old 
> machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed 
> out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and 
> UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops 
> connections before the system frees up.

Eeek. We should seriously consider increasing Freenet's base priority from 
BELOW_NORMAL to NORMAL. We use thread priorities everywhere, only threads 
which are critical and don't use much CPU are high priority, so 95% of the 
time this shouldn't impact on system performance...

See https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2337
> 
> Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it 
> hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP 
> services manager, it connects immediately.

That's bad. It ought to recover. Does it try to reseed?
> 
> Is that behavior normal?

No, it may be a bug.
> 
> > > Freenet runs as user ".\freenet", and I get that y'all switched from
> > > running as LocalSystem to improve security
> >.
> >
> >Yes.
> >
> > > Am I correct in
> > > guessing that ".\freenet" is linked to my user account, and so the
> > > Freenet service hangs after I log off?
> >
> >No, it's a separate user.
> >
> > > Could Freenet run safely as
> > > LocalService or NetworkService?
> >
> >No idea. Probably. Would it be better?
> 
> I have no clue.  On my Win XP system now, Freenet is the only service 
> running as a non-standard user.  Most services are running as 
> LocalSystem, and the rest are running as LocalService or 
> NetworkService.  I gather that LocalService and NetworkService have 
> restricted permissions, apparently more-or-less comparable to default 
> non-admin users.  But I've never needed to mess with that stuff, so I 
> don't know it.  And it seems to be OK as is, so I won't mess with it.

We could do that. I dunno if it would be better, the current way may be better 
although it's not what other apps do...

https://bugs.freenetproject.org/view.php?id=2336


pgpa1VuHFdTAX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 12:43 PM 5/3/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:



> > My node's been up continuously now for about three days, with ca. 20
> > peers, 25.1 KiB/sec average input rate, 27.1 KiB/sec average output
> > rate (of 50.0 KiB/sec) and 13.9 KiB/sec average payload output rate
> > (51%).  Is that reasonable?
>
>With 20 connected/backed off peers? It's a bit low, mine's been a bit low
>lately too though...

I've only provided the default 128M wrapper memory.  Could that be a 
factor?  Are there other config settings that might be limiting throughput?

> > However, in order to achieve that, I've had to stay logged on Win
> > NT.  If I log off while sleeping or away, which has been my practice,
> > Freenet appears to keep running (based on network activity) for a
> > while.  However, when I log on the next day, I find that the node
> > isn't connected to any peers, and also that it won't connect until I
> > stop and restart it.
>
>That is really bizarre. File a bug on https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ .
>Include wrapper.log and any ERRORs in logs/ ...

After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs 
just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However, 
when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the 
node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old 
machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed 
out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and 
UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops 
connections before the system frees up.

Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it 
hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP 
services manager, it connects immediately.

Is that behavior normal?

> > Freenet runs as user ".\freenet", and I get that y'all switched from
> > running as LocalSystem to improve security
>.
>
>Yes.
>
> > Am I correct in
> > guessing that ".\freenet" is linked to my user account, and so the
> > Freenet service hangs after I log off?
>
>No, it's a separate user.
>
> > Could Freenet run safely as
> > LocalService or NetworkService?
>
>No idea. Probably. Would it be better?

I have no clue.  On my Win XP system now, Freenet is the only service 
running as a non-standard user.  Most services are running as 
LocalSystem, and the rest are running as LocalService or 
NetworkService.  I gather that LocalService and NetworkService have 
restricted permissions, apparently more-or-less comparable to default 
non-admin users.  But I've never needed to mess with that stuff, so I 
don't know it.  And it seems to be OK as is, so I won't mess with it.



> > >Why not just restart [the node] each time? The only reason to recreate it
> > >on each startup is in case the datastore contains something 
> incriminating...
> >
> > Although I have no interest in seeing for myself, I gather that
> > Freenet contains truly awful stuff.  If that's so, it's quite likely
> > that "the datastore contains something incriminating".  Right?
>
>Yes, but it's encrypted, and you don't have the key. To find the key 
>you would
>have to go looking for such filth. This provides a reasonable degree of
>plausible deniability.
>
> > But
> > given that I'm running Freenet, I've obviously accepted that as a
> > necessary cost of freedom.  Also, I get that the datastore is
> > encrypted, and that I cannot be expected to know what's
> > there.  Conversely, the contents of my download folder are not
> > encrypted, but arguably I must have put them there intentionally.
>
>Right, that's the difference.
> >
> > Even so, I'm nervous.  Perhaps there are flogs with driveby
> > downloads.  I was thinking of running in nonpersistent mode as an
> > additional safeguard.  But I do appreciate how doing that would
> > partially defeat Freenet's data routing and retention logic.  Anyway,
> > I'm now thinking that running an encrypted virtual machine may be an
> > acceptable alternative.
>
>Possibly. If it's transient it would be recreated on startup; if it isn't, it
>would obviously be possible to investigate it if the computer was taken away.

For now, I've just created an AES-encrypted virtual disk to store downloads.



>* PGP Signed by an unknown key
>* text/plain body
>* Unknown Key
>* 0xE43DA450

=
Jim Cook  

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 12:43 PM 5/3/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:



> > My node's been up continuously now for about three days, with ca. 20
> > peers, 25.1 KiB/sec average input rate, 27.1 KiB/sec average output
> > rate (of 50.0 KiB/sec) and 13.9 KiB/sec average payload output rate
> > (51%).  Is that reasonable?
>
>With 20 connected/backed off peers? It's a bit low, mine's been a bit low
>lately too though...

I've only provided the default 128M wrapper memory.  Could that be a 
factor?  Are there other config settings that might be limiting throughput?

> > However, in order to achieve that, I've had to stay logged on Win
> > NT.  If I log off while sleeping or away, which has been my practice,
> > Freenet appears to keep running (based on network activity) for a
> > while.  However, when I log on the next day, I find that the node
> > isn't connected to any peers, and also that it won't connect until I
> > stop and restart it.
>
>That is really bizarre. File a bug on https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ .
>Include wrapper.log and any ERRORs in logs/ ...

After checking the logs, it's clear what's going on.  Freenet runs 
just fine after I log off; indeed, it seems to be happier.  However, 
when I log on, various Freenet processes start timing out, and the 
node drops all connections after ca. 10 min.  This is a fairly old 
machine with a 2.8 GHz Pentium D and 2 Gb RAM, and it's pretty maxed 
out during logon.  It loads three apps (Firefox, Eudora and 
UltraEdit) and runs a few system and malware scans, and Freenet drops 
connections before the system frees up.

Although Freenet reports that it's trying to connect, I find that it 
hasn't after more than 2 hr.  But once I stop and restart in Win XP 
services manager, it connects immediately.

Is that behavior normal?

> > Freenet runs as user ".\freenet", and I get that y'all switched from
> > running as LocalSystem to improve security
>.
>
>Yes.
>
> > Am I correct in
> > guessing that ".\freenet" is linked to my user account, and so the
> > Freenet service hangs after I log off?
>
>No, it's a separate user.
>
> > Could Freenet run safely as
> > LocalService or NetworkService?
>
>No idea. Probably. Would it be better?

I have no clue.  On my Win XP system now, Freenet is the only service 
running as a non-standard user.  Most services are running as 
LocalSystem, and the rest are running as LocalService or 
NetworkService.  I gather that LocalService and NetworkService have 
restricted permissions, apparently more-or-less comparable to default 
non-admin users.  But I've never needed to mess with that stuff, so I 
don't know it.  And it seems to be OK as is, so I won't mess with it.



> > >Why not just restart [the node] each time? The only reason to recreate it
> > >on each startup is in case the datastore contains something 
> incriminating...
> >
> > Although I have no interest in seeing for myself, I gather that
> > Freenet contains truly awful stuff.  If that's so, it's quite likely
> > that "the datastore contains something incriminating".  Right?
>
>Yes, but it's encrypted, and you don't have the key. To find the key 
>you would
>have to go looking for such filth. This provides a reasonable degree of
>plausible deniability.
>
> > But
> > given that I'm running Freenet, I've obviously accepted that as a
> > necessary cost of freedom.  Also, I get that the datastore is
> > encrypted, and that I cannot be expected to know what's
> > there.  Conversely, the contents of my download folder are not
> > encrypted, but arguably I must have put them there intentionally.
>
>Right, that's the difference.
> >
> > Even so, I'm nervous.  Perhaps there are flogs with driveby
> > downloads.  I was thinking of running in nonpersistent mode as an
> > additional safeguard.  But I do appreciate how doing that would
> > partially defeat Freenet's data routing and retention logic.  Anyway,
> > I'm now thinking that running an encrypted virtual machine may be an
> > acceptable alternative.
>
>Possibly. If it's transient it would be recreated on startup; if it isn't, it
>would obviously be possible to investigate it if the computer was taken away.

For now, I've just created an AES-encrypted virtual disk to store downloads.



>* PGP Signed by an unknown key
>* text/plain body
>* Unknown Key
>* 0xE43DA450

=
Jim Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 


___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Saturday 03 May 2008 01:58, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 01:11 PM 4/30/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> >* PGP Signed by an unknown key
> >
> >On Wednesday 30 April 2008 00:27, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > At 06:18 AM 4/29/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Old Signed by an unknown key
> > > >
> > > >On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > > > Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my
> > > > > naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT
> > > > > file  that
> > > > > facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.
> > > >
> > > >Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, 
> > the problem
> >is
> > > >that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change 
> > the link the
> > > >user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not
> >something
> > > >we really want to do...
> > >
> > > In retrospect, it's trivial.  And I get why you've included a freenet
> > > Firefox profile and made it difficult to edit.
> >
> >You mean in that we disable the config related menu items?
> 
> Yes.  As I understand it, there are two key issues: (1) users need to 
> know which browser is accessing Freenet, and which is accessing the 
> net; and (2) users need to avoid opening 200 connections to public 
> webservers.  Right?

Pretty much. There are also security issues e.g. you should use a separate 
browser for freenet so that sites you browse on the first one don't know 
about your freenet browsing (link colors, visible-if-visited attributes etc).
> 
> > > However, given the
> > > default "Don't ask at startup" setting in Firefox's profile manager,
> > > and the fact that I'd never run multiple profiles, I was blindsided,
> > > and thought that Freenet had trashed my Firefox setup.
> >
> >Yeah, Firefox is a problem. Not using it is a worse problem. Hopefully we 
can
> >find a better solution...
> >
> > > Now I know to
> > > create Firefox shortcuts for my normal and freenet profiles with
> > > targets of the form "" -P 
> > > -no-remote.  What's the downside of doing that during Freenet
> > > installation?  Or, if that's hard to implement, it'd be great to
> > > include an explanation of how to do that in the readme or FAQ.
> >
> >It is difficult to implement. It is also unnecessary if you do what you're
> >told! We open a browser window with a page explaining that it's a really 
bad
> >idea to close this page before closing the browser running Freenet ... if 
you
> >close it anyway, Bad Things happen - namely your firefox profile default 
gets
> >reset.
> 
> Yeah, I got that.  And I'm not very good at doing what I'm told ;-)
> 
> > > > > I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous
> > > > > mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but
> > > > > acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output 
rates
> > > > > are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output
> > > > > tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to
> > > > > originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be 
working.
> 
> 
> 
> My node's been up continuously now for about three days, with ca. 20 
> peers, 25.1 KiB/sec average input rate, 27.1 KiB/sec average output 
> rate (of 50.0 KiB/sec) and 13.9 KiB/sec average payload output rate 
> (51%).  Is that reasonable?

With 20 connected/backed off peers? It's a bit low, mine's been a bit low 
lately too though...
> 
> However, in order to achieve that, I've had to stay logged on Win 
> NT.  If I log off while sleeping or away, which has been my practice, 
> Freenet appears to keep running (based on network activity) for a 
> while.  However, when I log on the next day, I find that the node 
> isn't connected to any peers, and also that it won't connect until I 
> stop and restart it.

That is really bizarre. File a bug on https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ . 
Include wrapper.log and any ERRORs in logs/ ...
> 
> Freenet runs as user ".\freenet", and I get that y'all switched from 
> running as LocalSystem to improve security 
.  

Yes.

> Am I correct in  
> guessing that ".\freenet" is linked to my user account, and so the 
> Freenet service hangs after I log off?  

No, it's a separate user.

> Could Freenet run safely as  
> LocalService or NetworkService?

No idea. Probably. Would it be better?
> 
> > > > > I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm
> > > > > thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated
> > > > > physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so
> > > > > that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it
> > > > > down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up 
for
> > > > > at least a few weeks per instance?
> > > >
> > > >Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously 

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Saturday 03 May 2008 01:58, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 01:11 PM 4/30/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> >* PGP Signed by an unknown key
> >
> >On Wednesday 30 April 2008 00:27, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > At 06:18 AM 4/29/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Old Signed by an unknown key
> > > >
> > > >On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > > > Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my
> > > > > naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT
> > > > > file  that
> > > > > facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.
> > > >
> > > >Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, 
> > the problem
> >is
> > > >that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change 
> > the link the
> > > >user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not
> >something
> > > >we really want to do...
> > >
> > > In retrospect, it's trivial.  And I get why you've included a freenet
> > > Firefox profile and made it difficult to edit.
> >
> >You mean in that we disable the config related menu items?
> 
> Yes.  As I understand it, there are two key issues: (1) users need to 
> know which browser is accessing Freenet, and which is accessing the 
> net; and (2) users need to avoid opening 200 connections to public 
> webservers.  Right?

Pretty much. There are also security issues e.g. you should use a separate 
browser for freenet so that sites you browse on the first one don't know 
about your freenet browsing (link colors, visible-if-visited attributes etc).
> 
> > > However, given the
> > > default "Don't ask at startup" setting in Firefox's profile manager,
> > > and the fact that I'd never run multiple profiles, I was blindsided,
> > > and thought that Freenet had trashed my Firefox setup.
> >
> >Yeah, Firefox is a problem. Not using it is a worse problem. Hopefully we 
can
> >find a better solution...
> >
> > > Now I know to
> > > create Firefox shortcuts for my normal and freenet profiles with
> > > targets of the form "" -P 
> > > -no-remote.  What's the downside of doing that during Freenet
> > > installation?  Or, if that's hard to implement, it'd be great to
> > > include an explanation of how to do that in the readme or FAQ.
> >
> >It is difficult to implement. It is also unnecessary if you do what you're
> >told! We open a browser window with a page explaining that it's a really 
bad
> >idea to close this page before closing the browser running Freenet ... if 
you
> >close it anyway, Bad Things happen - namely your firefox profile default 
gets
> >reset.
> 
> Yeah, I got that.  And I'm not very good at doing what I'm told ;-)
> 
> > > > > I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous
> > > > > mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but
> > > > > acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output 
rates
> > > > > are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output
> > > > > tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to
> > > > > originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be 
working.
> 
> 
> 
> My node's been up continuously now for about three days, with ca. 20 
> peers, 25.1 KiB/sec average input rate, 27.1 KiB/sec average output 
> rate (of 50.0 KiB/sec) and 13.9 KiB/sec average payload output rate 
> (51%).  Is that reasonable?

With 20 connected/backed off peers? It's a bit low, mine's been a bit low 
lately too though...
> 
> However, in order to achieve that, I've had to stay logged on Win 
> NT.  If I log off while sleeping or away, which has been my practice, 
> Freenet appears to keep running (based on network activity) for a 
> while.  However, when I log on the next day, I find that the node 
> isn't connected to any peers, and also that it won't connect until I 
> stop and restart it.

That is really bizarre. File a bug on https://bugs.freenetproject.org/ . 
Include wrapper.log and any ERRORs in logs/ ...
> 
> Freenet runs as user ".\freenet", and I get that y'all switched from 
> running as LocalSystem to improve security 
.  

Yes.

> Am I correct in  
> guessing that ".\freenet" is linked to my user account, and so the 
> Freenet service hangs after I log off?  

No, it's a separate user.

> Could Freenet run safely as  
> LocalService or NetworkService?

No idea. Probably. Would it be better?
> 
> > > > > I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm
> > > > > thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated
> > > > > physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so
> > > > > that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it
> > > > > down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up 
for
> > > > > at least a few weeks per instance?
> > > >
> > > >Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously 

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 01:11 PM 4/30/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:

>* PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
>On Wednesday 30 April 2008 00:27, Jim Cook wrote:
> > At 06:18 AM 4/29/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> >
> > >> Old Signed by an unknown key
> > >
> > >On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > > Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my
> > > > naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT
> > > > file  that
> > > > facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.
> > >
> > >Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, 
> the problem
>is
> > >that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change 
> the link the
> > >user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not
>something
> > >we really want to do...
> >
> > In retrospect, it's trivial.  And I get why you've included a freenet
> > Firefox profile and made it difficult to edit.
>
>You mean in that we disable the config related menu items?

Yes.  As I understand it, there are two key issues: (1) users need to 
know which browser is accessing Freenet, and which is accessing the 
net; and (2) users need to avoid opening 200 connections to public 
webservers.  Right?

> > However, given the
> > default "Don't ask at startup" setting in Firefox's profile manager,
> > and the fact that I'd never run multiple profiles, I was blindsided,
> > and thought that Freenet had trashed my Firefox setup.
>
>Yeah, Firefox is a problem. Not using it is a worse problem. Hopefully we can
>find a better solution...
>
> > Now I know to
> > create Firefox shortcuts for my normal and freenet profiles with
> > targets of the form "" -P 
> > -no-remote.  What's the downside of doing that during Freenet
> > installation?  Or, if that's hard to implement, it'd be great to
> > include an explanation of how to do that in the readme or FAQ.
>
>It is difficult to implement. It is also unnecessary if you do what you're
>told! We open a browser window with a page explaining that it's a really bad
>idea to close this page before closing the browser running Freenet ... if you
>close it anyway, Bad Things happen - namely your firefox profile default gets
>reset.

Yeah, I got that.  And I'm not very good at doing what I'm told ;-)

> > > > I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous
> > > > mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but
> > > > acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates
> > > > are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output
> > > > tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to
> > > > originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.



My node's been up continuously now for about three days, with ca. 20 
peers, 25.1 KiB/sec average input rate, 27.1 KiB/sec average output 
rate (of 50.0 KiB/sec) and 13.9 KiB/sec average payload output rate 
(51%).  Is that reasonable?

However, in order to achieve that, I've had to stay logged on Win 
NT.  If I log off while sleeping or away, which has been my practice, 
Freenet appears to keep running (based on network activity) for a 
while.  However, when I log on the next day, I find that the node 
isn't connected to any peers, and also that it won't connect until I 
stop and restart it.

Freenet runs as user ".\freenet", and I get that y'all switched from 
running as LocalSystem to improve security 
.  Am I correct in 
guessing that ".\freenet" is linked to my user account, and so the 
Freenet service hangs after I log off?  Could Freenet run safely as 
LocalService or NetworkService?

> > > > I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm
> > > > thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated
> > > > physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so
> > > > that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it
> > > > down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for
> > > > at least a few weeks per instance?
> > >
> > >Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously it would be
> > >better for the network if it was just up.
> >
> > Would it be better for the network if I paused it as a snapshot
> > whenever I needed to reboot?  I don't reboot often, just as part of
> > installing updates or when messing with hardware.
>
>Why not just restart it each time? The only reason to recreate it on each
>startup is in case the datastore contains something incriminating...

Although I have no interest in seeing for myself, I gather that 
Freenet contains truly awful stuff.  If that's so, it's quite likely 
that "the datastore contains something incriminating".  Right?  But 
given that I'm running Freenet, I've obviously accepted that as a 
necessary cost of freedom.  Also, I get that the datastore is 
encrypted, and that I cannot be

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 01:11 PM 4/30/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:

>* PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
>On Wednesday 30 April 2008 00:27, Jim Cook wrote:
> > At 06:18 AM 4/29/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> >
> > >> Old Signed by an unknown key
> > >
> > >On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > > Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my
> > > > naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT
> > > > file  that
> > > > facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.
> > >
> > >Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, 
> the problem
>is
> > >that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change 
> the link the
> > >user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not
>something
> > >we really want to do...
> >
> > In retrospect, it's trivial.  And I get why you've included a freenet
> > Firefox profile and made it difficult to edit.
>
>You mean in that we disable the config related menu items?

Yes.  As I understand it, there are two key issues: (1) users need to 
know which browser is accessing Freenet, and which is accessing the 
net; and (2) users need to avoid opening 200 connections to public 
webservers.  Right?

> > However, given the
> > default "Don't ask at startup" setting in Firefox's profile manager,
> > and the fact that I'd never run multiple profiles, I was blindsided,
> > and thought that Freenet had trashed my Firefox setup.
>
>Yeah, Firefox is a problem. Not using it is a worse problem. Hopefully we can
>find a better solution...
>
> > Now I know to
> > create Firefox shortcuts for my normal and freenet profiles with
> > targets of the form "" -P 
> > -no-remote.  What's the downside of doing that during Freenet
> > installation?  Or, if that's hard to implement, it'd be great to
> > include an explanation of how to do that in the readme or FAQ.
>
>It is difficult to implement. It is also unnecessary if you do what you're
>told! We open a browser window with a page explaining that it's a really bad
>idea to close this page before closing the browser running Freenet ... if you
>close it anyway, Bad Things happen - namely your firefox profile default gets
>reset.

Yeah, I got that.  And I'm not very good at doing what I'm told ;-)

> > > > I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous
> > > > mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but
> > > > acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates
> > > > are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output
> > > > tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to
> > > > originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.



My node's been up continuously now for about three days, with ca. 20 
peers, 25.1 KiB/sec average input rate, 27.1 KiB/sec average output 
rate (of 50.0 KiB/sec) and 13.9 KiB/sec average payload output rate 
(51%).  Is that reasonable?

However, in order to achieve that, I've had to stay logged on Win 
NT.  If I log off while sleeping or away, which has been my practice, 
Freenet appears to keep running (based on network activity) for a 
while.  However, when I log on the next day, I find that the node 
isn't connected to any peers, and also that it won't connect until I 
stop and restart it.

Freenet runs as user ".\freenet", and I get that y'all switched from 
running as LocalSystem to improve security 
.  Am I correct in 
guessing that ".\freenet" is linked to my user account, and so the 
Freenet service hangs after I log off?  Could Freenet run safely as 
LocalService or NetworkService?

> > > > I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm
> > > > thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated
> > > > physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so
> > > > that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it
> > > > down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for
> > > > at least a few weeks per instance?
> > >
> > >Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously it would be
> > >better for the network if it was just up.
> >
> > Would it be better for the network if I paused it as a snapshot
> > whenever I needed to reboot?  I don't reboot often, just as part of
> > installing updates or when messing with hardware.
>
>Why not just restart it each time? The only reason to recreate it on each
>startup is in case the datastore contains something incriminating...

Although I have no interest in seeing for myself, I gather that 
Freenet contains truly awful stuff.  If that's so, it's quite likely 
that "the datastore contains something incriminating".  Right?  But 
given that I'm running Freenet, I've obviously accepted that as a 
necessary cost of freedom.  Also, I get that the datastore is 
encrypted, and that I cannot be

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 30 April 2008 00:27, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 06:18 AM 4/29/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> >* PGP Signed by an unknown key
> >
> >On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my
> > > naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT
> > > file  that
> > > facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.
> >
> >Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, the problem 
is
> >that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change the link the
> >user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not 
something
> >we really want to do...
> 
> In retrospect, it's trivial.  And I get why you've included a freenet 
> Firefox profile and made it difficult to edit.  

You mean in that we disable the config related menu items?

> However, given the  
> default "Don't ask at startup" setting in Firefox's profile manager, 
> and the fact that I'd never run multiple profiles, I was blindsided, 
> and thought that Freenet had trashed my Firefox setup.  

Yeah, Firefox is a problem. Not using it is a worse problem. Hopefully we can 
find a better solution...

> Now I know to  
> create Firefox shortcuts for my normal and freenet profiles with 
> targets of the form "" -P  
> -no-remote.  What's the downside of doing that during Freenet 
> installation?  Or, if that's hard to implement, it'd be great to 
> include an explanation of how to do that in the readme or FAQ.

It is difficult to implement. It is also unnecessary if you do what you're 
told! We open a browser window with a page explaining that it's a really bad 
idea to close this page before closing the browser running Freenet ... if you 
close it anyway, Bad Things happen - namely your firefox profile default gets 
reset.
> 
> > > I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous
> > > mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but
> > > acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates
> > > are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output
> > > tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to
> > > originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.
> > >
> > > I haven't seen anything (in the security links that you've posted, or
> > > elsewhere) about gaining admin access to other nodes via Freenet.  I
> > > can't imagine that y'all haven't considered this in coding
> > > Freenet.  So I'm being unreasonably paranoid, right?  Of course,
> > > there's always the risk of downloading malware (or getting it from my 
ISP
> >=-O).
> >
> >We may have exploitable bugs, but on that level, I doubt it. Java isn't
> >subject to buffer overflows or heap corruption.
> 
> That's very good to know.  Even so, I'm still nervous about running 
> Freenet on a machine that I use for work.  And that's why I'm 
> planning to run it in a virtual machine in nonpersistent mode.
> 
> > > Yesterday, I also had a node up for ca. 12 hours on Ubuntu 7.10 in
> > > VMware Player.  Before I trashed it and went to sleep, it was
> > > connected to ca. 15 nodes, and seemed happy.  However, although I
> > > added this node and my Win NT node to each other as trusted peers,
> > > they never connected.  Is that a consequence of running in
> > > promiscuous mode?  How do I tell them to connect?
> >
> >They're on the same LAN. There are options you need to set to make that 
work.
> 
> OK, I get that (and from Volodya's reply).  It was just an experiment 
> to learn adding friends.  I'm about ready to start enrolling real friends.
> 
> > > I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm
> > > thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated
> > > physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so
> > > that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it
> > > down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for
> > > at least a few weeks per instance?
> >
> >Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously it would be
> >better for the network if it was just up.
> 
> Would it be better for the network if I paused it as a snapshot 
> whenever I needed to reboot?  I don't reboot often, just as part of 
> installing updates or when messing with hardware.

Why not just restart it each time? The only reason to recreate it on each 
startup is in case the datastore contains something incriminating...
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Wednesday 30 April 2008 00:27, Jim Cook wrote:
> At 06:18 AM 4/29/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> 
> >* PGP Signed by an unknown key
> >
> >On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> > > Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my
> > > naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT
> > > file  that
> > > facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.
> >
> >Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, the problem 
is
> >that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change the link the
> >user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not 
something
> >we really want to do...
> 
> In retrospect, it's trivial.  And I get why you've included a freenet 
> Firefox profile and made it difficult to edit.  

You mean in that we disable the config related menu items?

> However, given the  
> default "Don't ask at startup" setting in Firefox's profile manager, 
> and the fact that I'd never run multiple profiles, I was blindsided, 
> and thought that Freenet had trashed my Firefox setup.  

Yeah, Firefox is a problem. Not using it is a worse problem. Hopefully we can 
find a better solution...

> Now I know to  
> create Firefox shortcuts for my normal and freenet profiles with 
> targets of the form "" -P  
> -no-remote.  What's the downside of doing that during Freenet 
> installation?  Or, if that's hard to implement, it'd be great to 
> include an explanation of how to do that in the readme or FAQ.

It is difficult to implement. It is also unnecessary if you do what you're 
told! We open a browser window with a page explaining that it's a really bad 
idea to close this page before closing the browser running Freenet ... if you 
close it anyway, Bad Things happen - namely your firefox profile default gets 
reset.
> 
> > > I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous
> > > mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but
> > > acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates
> > > are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output
> > > tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to
> > > originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.
> > >
> > > I haven't seen anything (in the security links that you've posted, or
> > > elsewhere) about gaining admin access to other nodes via Freenet.  I
> > > can't imagine that y'all haven't considered this in coding
> > > Freenet.  So I'm being unreasonably paranoid, right?  Of course,
> > > there's always the risk of downloading malware (or getting it from my 
ISP
> >=-O).
> >
> >We may have exploitable bugs, but on that level, I doubt it. Java isn't
> >subject to buffer overflows or heap corruption.
> 
> That's very good to know.  Even so, I'm still nervous about running 
> Freenet on a machine that I use for work.  And that's why I'm 
> planning to run it in a virtual machine in nonpersistent mode.
> 
> > > Yesterday, I also had a node up for ca. 12 hours on Ubuntu 7.10 in
> > > VMware Player.  Before I trashed it and went to sleep, it was
> > > connected to ca. 15 nodes, and seemed happy.  However, although I
> > > added this node and my Win NT node to each other as trusted peers,
> > > they never connected.  Is that a consequence of running in
> > > promiscuous mode?  How do I tell them to connect?
> >
> >They're on the same LAN. There are options you need to set to make that 
work.
> 
> OK, I get that (and from Volodya's reply).  It was just an experiment 
> to learn adding friends.  I'm about ready to start enrolling real friends.
> 
> > > I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm
> > > thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated
> > > physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so
> > > that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it
> > > down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for
> > > at least a few weeks per instance?
> >
> >Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously it would be
> >better for the network if it was just up.
> 
> Would it be better for the network if I paused it as a snapshot 
> whenever I needed to reboot?  I don't reboot often, just as part of 
> installing updates or when messing with hardware.

Why not just restart it each time? The only reason to recreate it on each 
startup is in case the datastore contains something incriminating...


pgp2AowRap0LS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 06:18 AM 4/29/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:

>* PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
>On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> > Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my
> > naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT
> > file  that
> > facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.
>
>Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, the problem is
>that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change the link the
>user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not something
>we really want to do...

In retrospect, it's trivial.  And I get why you've included a freenet 
Firefox profile and made it difficult to edit.  However, given the 
default "Don't ask at startup" setting in Firefox's profile manager, 
and the fact that I'd never run multiple profiles, I was blindsided, 
and thought that Freenet had trashed my Firefox setup.  Now I know to 
create Firefox shortcuts for my normal and freenet profiles with 
targets of the form "" -P  
-no-remote.  What's the downside of doing that during Freenet 
installation?  Or, if that's hard to implement, it'd be great to 
include an explanation of how to do that in the readme or FAQ.

> > I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous
> > mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but
> > acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates
> > are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output
> > tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to
> > originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.
> >
> > I haven't seen anything (in the security links that you've posted, or
> > elsewhere) about gaining admin access to other nodes via Freenet.  I
> > can't imagine that y'all haven't considered this in coding
> > Freenet.  So I'm being unreasonably paranoid, right?  Of course,
> > there's always the risk of downloading malware (or getting it from my ISP
>=-O).
>
>We may have exploitable bugs, but on that level, I doubt it. Java isn't
>subject to buffer overflows or heap corruption.

That's very good to know.  Even so, I'm still nervous about running 
Freenet on a machine that I use for work.  And that's why I'm 
planning to run it in a virtual machine in nonpersistent mode.

> > Yesterday, I also had a node up for ca. 12 hours on Ubuntu 7.10 in
> > VMware Player.  Before I trashed it and went to sleep, it was
> > connected to ca. 15 nodes, and seemed happy.  However, although I
> > added this node and my Win NT node to each other as trusted peers,
> > they never connected.  Is that a consequence of running in
> > promiscuous mode?  How do I tell them to connect?
>
>They're on the same LAN. There are options you need to set to make that work.

OK, I get that (and from Volodya's reply).  It was just an experiment 
to learn adding friends.  I'm about ready to start enrolling real friends.

> > I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm
> > thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated
> > physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so
> > that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it
> > down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for
> > at least a few weeks per instance?
>
>Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously it would be
>better for the network if it was just up.

Would it be better for the network if I paused it as a snapshot 
whenever I needed to reboot?  I don't reboot often, just as part of 
installing updates or when messing with hardware.

> > Also, I'd appreciate guidance re optimal CPU, memory, storage and
> > bandwidth settings.  The server has two 3.6 GHz Xeons and 4 Gb RAM,
> > and I could spare 100 Gb RAID 10 storage and maybe 50 KiB/sec output
>bandwidth.
>
>Sounds nice.

It's my SQL slave :-)

>* Unknown Key
>* 0xE43DA450

=
Jim Cook   

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

At 06:18 AM 4/29/2008, Matthew Toseland wrote:

>* PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
>On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> > Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my
> > naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT
> > file  that
> > facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.
>
>Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, the problem is
>that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change the link the
>user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not something
>we really want to do...

In retrospect, it's trivial.  And I get why you've included a freenet 
Firefox profile and made it difficult to edit.  However, given the 
default "Don't ask at startup" setting in Firefox's profile manager, 
and the fact that I'd never run multiple profiles, I was blindsided, 
and thought that Freenet had trashed my Firefox setup.  Now I know to 
create Firefox shortcuts for my normal and freenet profiles with 
targets of the form "" -P  
-no-remote.  What's the downside of doing that during Freenet 
installation?  Or, if that's hard to implement, it'd be great to 
include an explanation of how to do that in the readme or FAQ.

> > I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous
> > mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but
> > acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates
> > are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output
> > tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to
> > originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.
> >
> > I haven't seen anything (in the security links that you've posted, or
> > elsewhere) about gaining admin access to other nodes via Freenet.  I
> > can't imagine that y'all haven't considered this in coding
> > Freenet.  So I'm being unreasonably paranoid, right?  Of course,
> > there's always the risk of downloading malware (or getting it from my ISP
>=-O).
>
>We may have exploitable bugs, but on that level, I doubt it. Java isn't
>subject to buffer overflows or heap corruption.

That's very good to know.  Even so, I'm still nervous about running 
Freenet on a machine that I use for work.  And that's why I'm 
planning to run it in a virtual machine in nonpersistent mode.

> > Yesterday, I also had a node up for ca. 12 hours on Ubuntu 7.10 in
> > VMware Player.  Before I trashed it and went to sleep, it was
> > connected to ca. 15 nodes, and seemed happy.  However, although I
> > added this node and my Win NT node to each other as trusted peers,
> > they never connected.  Is that a consequence of running in
> > promiscuous mode?  How do I tell them to connect?
>
>They're on the same LAN. There are options you need to set to make that work.

OK, I get that (and from Volodya's reply).  It was just an experiment 
to learn adding friends.  I'm about ready to start enrolling real friends.

> > I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm
> > thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated
> > physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so
> > that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it
> > down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for
> > at least a few weeks per instance?
>
>Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously it would be
>better for the network if it was just up.

Would it be better for the network if I paused it as a snapshot 
whenever I needed to reboot?  I don't reboot often, just as part of 
installing updates or when messing with hardware.

> > Also, I'd appreciate guidance re optimal CPU, memory, storage and
> > bandwidth settings.  The server has two 3.6 GHz Xeons and 4 Gb RAM,
> > and I could spare 100 Gb RAID 10 storage and maybe 50 KiB/sec output
>bandwidth.
>
>Sounds nice.

It's my SQL slave :-)

>* Unknown Key
>* 0xE43DA450

=
Jim Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  


___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my 
> naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT 
> file  that 
> facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.

Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, the problem is 
that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change the link the 
user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not something 
we really want to do...
> 
> I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous 
> mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but 
> acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates 
> are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output 
> tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to 
> originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.
> 
> I haven't seen anything (in the security links that you've posted, or 
> elsewhere) about gaining admin access to other nodes via Freenet.  I 
> can't imagine that y'all haven't considered this in coding 
> Freenet.  So I'm being unreasonably paranoid, right?  Of course, 
> there's always the risk of downloading malware (or getting it from my ISP 
=-O).

We may have exploitable bugs, but on that level, I doubt it. Java isn't 
subject to buffer overflows or heap corruption.
> 
> Yesterday, I also had a node up for ca. 12 hours on Ubuntu 7.10 in 
> VMware Player.  Before I trashed it and went to sleep, it was 
> connected to ca. 15 nodes, and seemed happy.  However, although I 
> added this node and my Win NT node to each other as trusted peers, 
> they never connected.  Is that a consequence of running in 
> promiscuous mode?  How do I tell them to connect?

They're on the same LAN. There are options you need to set to make that work.
> 
> I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm 
> thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated 
> physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so 
> that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it 
> down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for 
> at least a few weeks per instance?

Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously it would be 
better for the network if it was just up.
> 
> Also, I'd appreciate guidance re optimal CPU, memory, storage and 
> bandwidth settings.  The server has two 3.6 GHz Xeons and 4 Gb RAM, 
> and I could spare 100 Gb RAID 10 storage and maybe 50 KiB/sec output 
bandwidth.

Sounds nice.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Re: [freenet-support] update and more questions

[Matthew Toseland]

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 03:44, Jim Cook wrote:
> Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my 
> naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT 
> file  that 
> facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.

Running multiple instances with different profiles is trivial, the problem is 
that if you don't want unpleasant surprises you have to change the link the 
user normally launches FF from to include -no-remote. Which is not something 
we really want to do...
> 
> I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous 
> mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but 
> acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates 
> are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output 
> tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to 
> originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.
> 
> I haven't seen anything (in the security links that you've posted, or 
> elsewhere) about gaining admin access to other nodes via Freenet.  I 
> can't imagine that y'all haven't considered this in coding 
> Freenet.  So I'm being unreasonably paranoid, right?  Of course, 
> there's always the risk of downloading malware (or getting it from my ISP 
=-O).

We may have exploitable bugs, but on that level, I doubt it. Java isn't 
subject to buffer overflows or heap corruption.
> 
> Yesterday, I also had a node up for ca. 12 hours on Ubuntu 7.10 in 
> VMware Player.  Before I trashed it and went to sleep, it was 
> connected to ca. 15 nodes, and seemed happy.  However, although I 
> added this node and my Win NT node to each other as trusted peers, 
> they never connected.  Is that a consequence of running in 
> promiscuous mode?  How do I tell them to connect?

They're on the same LAN. There are options you need to set to make that work.
> 
> I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm 
> thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated 
> physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so 
> that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it 
> down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for 
> at least a few weeks per instance?

Not if it was online for a reasonable time, although obviously it would be 
better for the network if it was just up.
> 
> Also, I'd appreciate guidance re optimal CPU, memory, storage and 
> bandwidth settings.  The server has two 3.6 GHz Xeons and 4 Gb RAM, 
> and I could spare 100 Gb RAID 10 storage and maybe 50 KiB/sec output 
bandwidth.

Sounds nice.


pgp7phPDmIDCF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my 
naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT 
file  that 
facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.

I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous 
mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but 
acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates 
are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output 
tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to 
originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.

I haven't seen anything (in the security links that you've posted, or 
elsewhere) about gaining admin access to other nodes via Freenet.  I 
can't imagine that y'all haven't considered this in coding 
Freenet.  So I'm being unreasonably paranoid, right?  Of course, 
there's always the risk of downloading malware (or getting it from my ISP =-O).

Yesterday, I also had a node up for ca. 12 hours on Ubuntu 7.10 in 
VMware Player.  Before I trashed it and went to sleep, it was 
connected to ca. 15 nodes, and seemed happy.  However, although I 
added this node and my Win NT node to each other as trusted peers, 
they never connected.  Is that a consequence of running in 
promiscuous mode?  How do I tell them to connect?

I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm 
thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated 
physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so 
that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it 
down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for 
at least a few weeks per instance?

Also, I'd appreciate guidance re optimal CPU, memory, storage and 
bandwidth settings.  The server has two 3.6 GHz Xeons and 4 Gb RAM, 
and I could spare 100 Gb RAID 10 storage and maybe 50 KiB/sec output bandwidth.

=
Jim Cook   

[freenet-support] update and more questions

[Jim Cook]

Thank you again, Matthew (and Volodya) for your patience with my 
naive questions.  Regarding the Firefox issue, I've found a Win BAT 
file  that 
facilitates running multiple instances with different profiles.

I've had a node up on a Win NT box for ca. 24 hours in promiscuous 
mode.  It's connected to ca. 20 nodes, and is slow but 
acceptably-responsive.  When I'm not browsing, input and output rates 
are 16.1 KiB/sec and 18.6 KiB/sec respectively.  Although output 
tends to mirror input, there are frequent output spikes that seem to 
originate from my node.  In other words, my node seems to be working.

I haven't seen anything (in the security links that you've posted, or 
elsewhere) about gaining admin access to other nodes via Freenet.  I 
can't imagine that y'all haven't considered this in coding 
Freenet.  So I'm being unreasonably paranoid, right?  Of course, 
there's always the risk of downloading malware (or getting it from my ISP =-O).

Yesterday, I also had a node up for ca. 12 hours on Ubuntu 7.10 in 
VMware Player.  Before I trashed it and went to sleep, it was 
connected to ca. 15 nodes, and seemed happy.  However, although I 
added this node and my Win NT node to each other as trusted peers, 
they never connected.  Is that a consequence of running in 
promiscuous mode?  How do I tell them to connect?

I have a relatively underutilized Win SBS 2003 server, and I'm 
thinking of setting up a node in Ubuntu/VMware via a dedicated 
physical NIC.  And I'm thinking of running in nonpersistent mode, so 
that the node and all traces of its activity are lost when I shut it 
down.  Would that be problematic for Freenet, if the node were up for 
at least a few weeks per instance?

Also, I'd appreciate guidance re optimal CPU, memory, storage and 
bandwidth settings.  The server has two 3.6 GHz Xeons and 4 Gb RAM, 
and I could spare 100 Gb RAID 10 storage and maybe 50 KiB/sec output bandwidth.

=
Jim Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  


___
Support mailing list
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] Update: Google Summer of Code

[Matthew Toseland]

Our four successful Google Summer of Code applicants, and their
projects. Google will pay these students $4,500 to do some work for us
over the summer (and us $500 to admin them):

Jerome Flesch (jflesch): A file upload and download utility.

This will be a cross between FUQID and FreeMule; it will be a
cross-platform replacement for FUQID, but it will also have searching
capabilities based on index plugins. Ian will mentor this project.

Michael Rogers (mrogers): Congestion Control and Load Balancing for
Freenet 0.7.

Michael will be working on simulations, theoretical work, and maybe
implementation, with me, to sort out Freenet's current load issues. Our
present load limiting/balancing algorithm not only does not work as well
as it should, but it also has some rather serious security issues.
Michael and I have been discussing a replacement on the devl list for
some time, but any new algorithm should be simulated.

Dave Baker (dbkr): Secure, email-like messaging over Freenet.

The Freemail project lives again! Dbkr will complete a portable
Freenet-based email system, with strong spam prevention features and
hopefully an optional web interface (for those who don't use SMTP/POP
directly). This will probably be bundled with future versions of
Freenet. It will be especially useful for human rights organizations and
distributed development (bringing the "darknet" freenet community closer
to the developers).

Florent Daigniere (nextgens): Installer and related components.

Nextgens' proposal encompasses creating an uninstaller, sorting out some
serious issues with the installer, creating a systray icon, fixing some
issues with the website, and especially sorting out the remaining issues
with free java implementations (some recent JVM-related bugs have shown
why this is important) and packaging Freenet for Linux distributions.
Nextgens has served us well for some months now, writing the original
installer amongst other things.
-- 
Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: 

[freenet-support] Update: JVM bugs and other things

[Matthew Toseland]

Recently we have been struggling with what looks like a JVM bug on
Linux. The symptom is that the node freezes up - CPU usage goes to near
zero, often all connections are backed off (usually all with the same
error), or it may go completely catatonic. When you do a stack trace,
the PacketSender thread (usually) is waiting to acquire a lock, but the
object in question is not locked by any thread. If you repeat the stack
dump seconds or minutes later, it's exactly the same.

This appears to be due to some sort of interaction between the Sun JVM
and NPTL. In 0.5 we implemented a hack to turn NPTL off by setting
LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1 or 2.2.5 (depending on distro). Unfortunately,
many modern distros ship without the pthreads libraries by default, and
some architectures (e.g. amd64) don't seem to support non-NPTL mode *at
all*. We had had many users turn it off in 0.5 for this reason, without
bad reports, so we assumed it was fixed. It isn't. At least not up to
1.5.0_06. There is nothing in the 1.5.0_07 changelog about it, so it is
probably still present in that version too.

We have had some good reports from people using the 1.6 beta JVM. I
suggest that you try this, if you are running a node on linux and
experiencing backoff on all connections with low cpu usage, or other
strange symptoms. And if it helps, or if it doesn't, please tell us.
Thank you.

It is possible that this will go away by itself with random code
tweaking; it didn't affect 0.7 much until fairly recently.

At present, Freenet 0.7 does not run under Kaffe, although it may under
sableVM. It does run under GCJ, but at present this produces a 12MB
binary, with minor issues. Nextgens is one of our 4 successful Google
Summer of Code students, and he will investigate this in more detail
later in the summer. He has recently written some update-over-freenet
code which will be rolled out soon.

Finally, the latest versions of Freenet have various improvements:
- Basic container support is implemented, and debugged. (*Very* large
  freesites will not be fully containerized, but they will succeed, and
  not produce unfetchable freesites).
- Basic inter-node messaging support.
- There is a new fproxy theme, "sky".
- Lots of bug fixes.
-- 
Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: 

[freenet-support] Update: Google Summer of Code

[Matthew Toseland]

Our four successful Google Summer of Code applicants, and their
projects. Google will pay these students $4,500 to do some work for us
over the summer (and us $500 to admin them):

Jerome Flesch (jflesch): A file upload and download utility.

This will be a cross between FUQID and FreeMule; it will be a
cross-platform replacement for FUQID, but it will also have searching
capabilities based on index plugins. Ian will mentor this project.

Michael Rogers (mrogers): Congestion Control and Load Balancing for
Freenet 0.7.

Michael will be working on simulations, theoretical work, and maybe
implementation, with me, to sort out Freenet's current load issues. Our
present load limiting/balancing algorithm not only does not work as well
as it should, but it also has some rather serious security issues.
Michael and I have been discussing a replacement on the devl list for
some time, but any new algorithm should be simulated.

Dave Baker (dbkr): Secure, email-like messaging over Freenet.

The Freemail project lives again! Dbkr will complete a portable
Freenet-based email system, with strong spam prevention features and
hopefully an optional web interface (for those who don't use SMTP/POP
directly). This will probably be bundled with future versions of
Freenet. It will be especially useful for human rights organizations and
distributed development (bringing the "darknet" freenet community closer
to the developers).

Florent Daigniere (nextgens): Installer and related components.

Nextgens' proposal encompasses creating an uninstaller, sorting out some
serious issues with the installer, creating a systray icon, fixing some
issues with the website, and especially sorting out the remaining issues
with free java implementations (some recent JVM-related bugs have shown
why this is important) and packaging Freenet for Linux distributions.
Nextgens has served us well for some months now, writing the original
installer amongst other things.
-- 
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
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

[freenet-support] Update: JVM bugs and other things

[Matthew Toseland]

Recently we have been struggling with what looks like a JVM bug on
Linux. The symptom is that the node freezes up - CPU usage goes to near
zero, often all connections are backed off (usually all with the same
error), or it may go completely catatonic. When you do a stack trace,
the PacketSender thread (usually) is waiting to acquire a lock, but the
object in question is not locked by any thread. If you repeat the stack
dump seconds or minutes later, it's exactly the same.

This appears to be due to some sort of interaction between the Sun JVM
and NPTL. In 0.5 we implemented a hack to turn NPTL off by setting
LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1 or 2.2.5 (depending on distro). Unfortunately,
many modern distros ship without the pthreads libraries by default, and
some architectures (e.g. amd64) don't seem to support non-NPTL mode *at
all*. We had had many users turn it off in 0.5 for this reason, without
bad reports, so we assumed it was fixed. It isn't. At least not up to
1.5.0_06. There is nothing in the 1.5.0_07 changelog about it, so it is
probably still present in that version too.

We have had some good reports from people using the 1.6 beta JVM. I
suggest that you try this, if you are running a node on linux and
experiencing backoff on all connections with low cpu usage, or other
strange symptoms. And if it helps, or if it doesn't, please tell us.
Thank you.

It is possible that this will go away by itself with random code
tweaking; it didn't affect 0.7 much until fairly recently.

At present, Freenet 0.7 does not run under Kaffe, although it may under
sableVM. It does run under GCJ, but at present this produces a 12MB
binary, with minor issues. Nextgens is one of our 4 successful Google
Summer of Code students, and he will investigate this in more detail
later in the summer. He has recently written some update-over-freenet
code which will be rolled out soon.

Finally, the latest versions of Freenet have various improvements:
- Basic container support is implemented, and debugged. (*Very* large
  freesites will not be fully containerized, but they will succeed, and
  not produce unfetchable freesites).
- Basic inter-node messaging support.
- There is a new fproxy theme, "sky".
- Lots of bug fixes.
-- 
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
Support@freenetproject.org
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [freenet-support] update seeds

[S]

On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 05:05:24 -0500
"Robert Greenage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I have lost my shortcut to udate my reseed node references. Can someone direct me?

Stable: http://freenetproject.org/snapshots/seednodes.ref

Unstable: http://freenetproject.org/snapshots/unstable.ref (rename to
seednodes.ref)

-s
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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] update seeds

[Robert Greenage]

I have lost my shortcut to udate my reseed node references. Can someone direct me?
 
 
--- Robert Greenage
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
 
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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] Update

[Fwolff33]

thx
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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] Update

[Fwolff33]

thx
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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] Update

[Edward J. Huff]

On Sun, 2004-02-01 at 01:28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Just made a update to 6457, and now my node is some kind of doomed...
>  :/ For some reason the node removed all entrys from the routing table
>  and also does not get any new entrys. At least it did not stop
>  working, since it gets enough inbound connections, but...I really
>  loved that routing table :( *cries* If this loss of routing tables was
>  needed and done on purpose, then forget this mail, but I just could
>  not figure out any good purpose of disabling the routing table (If
>  nobody can make any outbound connections theres no network anymore, or
>  am I wrong there?), so I thought I should report this behaviour.

People running unstable need to subscribe to either tech or devl.
There was a network reset only a few hours ago.  You need to
download unstable.ref to seednodes.ref and make sure the
last modified date is later than the time you stopped freenet.
Then you will find about 5 nodes in the RT at this time.
As more nodes join, your node will learn about them.

-- Ed Huff



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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] Update

[Fwolff33]

Just made a update to 6457, and now my node is some kind of doomed... :/ For some 
reason the node removed all entrys from the routing table and also does not get any 
new entrys. At least it did not stop working, since it gets enough inbound 
connections, but...I really loved that routing table :( *cries* If this loss of 
routing tables was needed and done on purpose, then forget this mail, but I just could 
not figure out any good purpose of disabling the routing table (If nobody can make any 
outbound connections theres no network anymore, or am I wrong there?), so I thought I 
should report this behaviour.
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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] Update re: DFI

[Nicholas Sturm]

What do you imply by "real" site?



> [Original Message]
> From: Conrad J. Sabatier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Freenet Development List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Freenet Support <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 12/14/2003 12:35:34 PM
> Subject: [freenet-support] Update re: DFI
>
> I've finally gotten around to adding a NIM feedback form to DFI
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]/DFI//), so if anyone has any
comments,
> please feel free.
>
> I'm still in the process of refining the spider and its results.  One
thing
> I've done recently, which I'm not sure is a good idea or not, is to ignore
> CHK keys.  It's just my feeling that a "real" freesite should use an SSK.

> Similarly, KSKs are passed right over as well.
>
> If anyone knows why this may be a bad idea, please let me know.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -- 
> Conrad Sabatier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - "In Unix veritas"
> freenet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/DFI//
> ___
> 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] Update re: DFI

[S]

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 11:34:25 -0600
"Conrad J. Sabatier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'm still in the process of refining the spider and its results.  One thing
> I've done recently, which I'm not sure is a good idea or not, is to ignore
> CHK keys.  It's just my feeling that a "real" freesite should use an SSK.  
> Similarly, KSKs are passed right over as well.
> 
> If anyone knows why this may be a bad idea, please let me know.

Due to the difficulty inserting freesites with e.g. FIW, is it possible
that some people are inserting large portions of their freesite via
FUQID and using FIW only to insert the index? If so, that may be a
reason to keep spidering CHKs at least for now.

-s
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support

[freenet-support] Update re: DFI

[Conrad J. Sabatier]

I've finally gotten around to adding a NIM feedback form to DFI
([EMAIL PROTECTED]/DFI//), so if anyone has any comments,
please feel free.

I'm still in the process of refining the spider and its results.  One thing
I've done recently, which I'm not sure is a good idea or not, is to ignore
CHK keys.  It's just my feeling that a "real" freesite should use an SSK.  
Similarly, KSKs are passed right over as well.

If anyone knows why this may be a bad idea, please let me know.

Thanks.

-- 
Conrad Sabatier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - "In Unix veritas"
freenet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/DFI//
___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support

[freenet-support] Update needed to page=stable for Debian package

[Paul Makepeace]

The link on the Download page
http://www.freenetproject.org/index.php?page=stable
to the Debian package should be 

http://download.sourceforge.net/freenet/freenet_0.3.9.1-1_all.deb

Paul

-- 
Which parts can be grouped?

___
Support mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/support