Re: [freenet-support] Whining again about bandwidth
On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 03:27:54PM -0500, Doug Bostrom wrote: Greetings, 534 seems to be running just great. For me there's just one remaining problem, which is that I still don't seem to be able to get bandwidth under control. I have things pinched off to 10K up and down, on the premise that since we're on ADSL here I can't allow more That's the combined limit or the individual limits? relayed data inward than my upstream connection can push out. There's some confusion about whether we're 128k No reason not to have asymmetrical limits. or 384k upstream. Our service agreement says 384k, but maybe that's on a good day with a tailwind; most of the time the upstream connection performs like 128k. So I'm erring on the safe side and setting things at 10K, which seems only marginally useful but ought to work and leave some overhead for other services to negotiate connections. I use 20k down, 5k up, on a 512/128 cable modem (I have three nodes in this configuration on the same machine, but they're not heavily loaded). Are you sure you aren't running any other bandwidth hogging apps? If you set it to 5k up, does the situation improve? Our pipe is still saturated after a few hours of freenet uptime. My spouse and I both work at home at least 50% of the time. Yesterday I absentmindedly referred to shutting down the freenet node here when Ann was desperately trying to get some work done. Big mistake! Busted! Now of course when things are slow I'm getting the question you don't have that THING turned on again, do you?, heh. Does bandwidth control take into account relayed data, ie data transiting my node as a result of indirection? And do you have any further tips I might apply to getting this to work? Very frustrating to see things working so well that I can't support a persistent node anymore! It takes into account everything, except for traffic to non-internet addresses. Thanks for any help that may be forthcoming. -- Democracies die behind closed doors. - Judge Damon Keith -- Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet/Coldstore open source hacker. Employed full time by Freenet Project Inc. from 11/9/02 to 11/1/03 http://freenetproject.org/ msg02103/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [freenet-support] Whining again about bandwidth
11/13/02 4:42:36 PM, Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have things pinched off to 10K up and down, on the premise that since we're on ADSL here I can't allow more That's the combined limit or the individual limits? Individual. I use 20k down, 5k up, on a 512/128 cable modem (I have three nodes in this configuration on the same machine, but they're not heavily loaded). Are you sure you aren't running any other bandwidth hogging apps? If you set it to 5k up, does the situation improve? No other apps taking bandwidth. Is it correct to conclude that if I'm on ADSL and I fail to take account of the asymmetric nature of the connection that problems can result? To wit: As I understand it, some requests arriving at my node are forwarded to other nodes, with the results being passed back through my node. If my inbound connecton is 2X, and my outbound connection is 1X, this means that data going _across_ my node can arrive at my node at twice the rate it can leave my node. In other words, data can transit my site based on Freenet's method of protection by indirection, and if the results of data requests that transit my site can arrive at my site much faster than they can then leave on their way to their ultimate destination, it seems that I must base my inbound bandwidth settings strictly on my outbound speed. Put yet another way, the trouble with the transit thing and ADSL is that since protocol packets requesting data are presumably smaller than the resulting data packets coming back, it seems easily possible that a node will happily accept and forward request packets and then attempt to relay far more resulting data packets than it's capable of dealing with if the inbound bandwidth settings are not arranged strictly on outbound connection speed. Is this a correct interpretation, or is the bandwidth control smart enough to account for ADSL peculiarities? I suppose another upshot of ADSL is that my local datastore can be posted to many times faster than it can be retrieved from, but that does not seem such a large potential problem as the transit issue. ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
[freenet-support] Whining again about bandwidth
Greetings, 534 seems to be running just great. For me there's just one remaining problem, which is that I still don't seem to be able to get bandwidth under control. I have things pinched off to 10K up and down, on the premise that since we're on ADSL here I can't allow more relayed data inward than my upstream connection can push out. There's some confusion about whether we're 128k or 384k upstream. Our service agreement says 384k, but maybe that's on a good day with a tailwind; most of the time the upstream connection performs like 128k. So I'm erring on the safe side and setting things at 10K, which seems only marginally useful but ought to work and leave some overhead for other services to negotiate connections. Our pipe is still saturated after a few hours of freenet uptime. My spouse and I both work at home at least 50% of the time. Yesterday I absentmindedly referred to shutting down the freenet node here when Ann was desperately trying to get some work done. Big mistake! Busted! Now of course when things are slow I'm getting the question you don't have that THING turned on again, do you?, heh. Does bandwidth control take into account relayed data, ie data transiting my node as a result of indirection? And do you have any further tips I might apply to getting this to work? Very frustrating to see things working so well that I can't support a persistent node anymore! Thanks for any help that may be forthcoming. -- Democracies die behind closed doors. - Judge Damon Keith ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
