[freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Wayne McDougall
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What would be nice (in lieu of being able to prefer certain IP ranges - I get local traffic far cheaper) would be a way to limit monthly transfer, eg set it so the node can use 5GB/month, and it'll aim for a daily transfer of about 170MB, but will

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Phillip Hutchings
[snip] 1. My experience is that I can get a limit of 5 Gb of *international* traffic a month (170 Mb a day) with Node bandwidth limits of Overall 0 Output 750 Input 0 Yup, a limit of 750 bytes per second. I need to experiment more with the Overall setting. Freenet is the single most effective

[freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Wayne McDougall
Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One thing that I can think of is limiting the size of incoming files not requested by the node directly - stop splitfiles and things going through. I'm more interested in the information, not movies, but I can't think of a tidy way to implement

[freenet-support] Apologies for DFI's absence

2004-05-24 Thread Conrad Sabatier
Not sure what happened. Well, first of all, I had disabled the automatic insert out of cron the day before, as I was doing a few last minute changes to the site, and forgot to re-enable it, so the insert was late getting started. Then, it appeared to run to normal completion, but when I checked

[freenet-support] Re: Java Applet

2004-05-24 Thread sally
Roger Oksanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The only limitation when creating a java applet is the sanbox the applet is run in. By default the sanbox limits the applet from connecting other hosts than the applet source host (e.g. the applet server must be running a freenet node accepting FCP

RE: [freenet-support] Re: Java Applet

2004-05-24 Thread Niklas Bergh
From the freenet.ini file: # A comma-separated list of hosts that may connect to the FCP port # (clientPort). If left blank, only the localhost will be allowed. If you set this, make sure localhost is included in the list or access won't be allowed from the local machine. # May be given as IP

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Toad
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 09:05:42AM +, Wayne McDougall wrote: Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What would be nice (in lieu of being able to prefer certain IP ranges - I get local traffic far cheaper) would be a way to limit monthly transfer, eg set it so the node can use

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Toad
Have you tried averageOutputLimit ? Does it work? On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 10:25:33PM +1200, Phillip Hutchings wrote: [snip] 1. My experience is that I can get a limit of 5 Gb of *international* traffic a month (170 Mb a day) with Node bandwidth limits of Overall 0 Output 750 Input 0

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Toad
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 11:32:50AM +, Wayne McDougall wrote: Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One thing that I can think of is limiting the size of incoming files not requested by the node directly - stop splitfiles and things going through. I'm more interested in the

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Mika Hirvonen
Toad wrote: On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 09:05:42AM +, Wayne McDougall wrote: So I've been working towards a Linux traffic shaper that gives sets no limits on traffic with domestic IP addresses and limits international traffic so the total monthly limit hits 5 Gb (my cap). HOW do you determine

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread TLD
Toad wrote: 2. I really suspect that more serious bandwidth limiting should be done at an operating system (router) level rather than at the Freenet level. I suspect that's what you'll be told around here. That way you can also take account of things happening other than your node. :-)

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Toad
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 08:42:28PM +0300, Mika Hirvonen wrote: Toad wrote: On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 09:05:42AM +, Wayne McDougall wrote: So I've been working towards a Linux traffic shaper that gives sets no limits on traffic with domestic IP addresses and limits international traffic

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Phillip Hutchings
On 24/05/2004, at 11:32 PM, Wayne McDougall wrote: Phillip Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One thing that I can think of is limiting the size of incoming files not requested by the node directly - stop splitfiles and things going through. I'm more interested in the information, not movies, but

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Phillip Hutchings
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 10:25:33PM +1200, Phillip Hutchings wrote: [bigger snip] Yeah, I'm looking at it, but there's no decent way to detect freenet packets. That's a feature :). Yeah, even on localhost :P IPTABLE's OWNER match target only works in the OUTPUT chain. I can't monitor something

Re: [freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Phillip Hutchings
On 25/05/2004, at 5:27 AM, Toad wrote: [snip] 2. I really suspect that more serious bandwidth limiting should be done at an operating system (router) level rather than at the Freenet level. I suspect that's what you'll be told around here. That way you can also take account of things happening

[freenet-support] Retiring from the project

2004-05-24 Thread Conrad Sabatier
It saddens me more than a little to have to announce this, but I've decided to retire from the freenet project. I will no longer be active as a developer or as an index site maintainer, or as the operator of a node. I'm truly sorry, but with only a 1 gHz machine with 512 MB of RAM, freenet

[freenet-support] Re: [freenet-dev] Retiring from the project

2004-05-24 Thread Ian Clarke
That is a shame. Clearly I don't agree with your reasoning, there is no evidence that any other language would not have similar or worse issues (consider the amount of time we would spend dealing with memory leaks and array overflows had we implemented in C++). As for focus, our experimental

[freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Wayne McDougall
Toad [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 09:05:42AM +, Wayne McDougall wrote: Perhaps. That would also lead to high message send times though. Freenet needs to know what the limit is even if you use external limiting. Fair enough. But given shared bandwidth needs shouldn't a

[freenet-support] Re: Traffic usage?

2004-05-24 Thread Wayne McDougall
TLD [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is message send time a problem? I mean, AFAIK freenet is able to recognize links with higher latency and use them as little as possible, thus reducing the outbound traffic over those links in favour of local (=not-so-limited) nodes. I think message send time IS