Timestamps are in GMT/BST.
[0:00] * ninja_ (im10ninjas@82-133-111-67.dyn.gotadsl.co.uk) Quit (Nick collision from services.)
[0:00] * ninja_ (~im10ninja@82-133-111-67.dyn.gotadsl.co.uk) has joined #freenet
[0:00] * hirvox (~hirvox@cs181027153.pp.htv.fi) Quit ()
[0:05] * Vix- (meow_@cae88-49-083.sc.rr.com) Quit (""There are three kinds of death in this world. There's heart death, there's brain death, and there's being off the network." -")
[1:35] -dmwaters- {global notice} Hi all! I'm about to take a server down for a scheduled outage. This shouldn't take long. I'll start in about five mins. Thank you for your patience, and thank you for using freenode!
[1:35] * IRCMonkey25 (~chatzilla@pcp02285889pcs.mchncb01.pa.comcast.net) Quit ("Chatzilla 0.9.64e [Mozilla rv:1.7/20040626]")
[1:43] * IRCMonkey25 (~chatzilla@pcp02285889pcs.mchncb01.pa.comcast.net) has joined #freenet
[1:43] <IRCMonkey25> I upgraded to 5090 and now I can't connect to anyone
[1:44] <IRCMonkey25> it has a zero in my open connections
[1:44] <IRCMonkey25> Then I upgraded to 5091 and it still is zero
[1:46] <IRCMonkey25> can someone help me please
[1:47] * spaetz (~spaetz@217-162-197-136.dclient.hispeed.ch) has joined #freenet
[1:47] * Iakin5 (~nb@212.105.104.162) Quit (niven.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
[1:47] * Tril (tril@bespin.org) Quit (niven.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
[1:47] * iip_i2p (~changate@host.teitel.net) Quit (niven.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
[1:47] * vsalento (~vsalento@cs136227.pp.htv.fi) Quit (niven.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
[1:49] * vsalento (~vsalento@cs136227.pp.htv.fi) has joined #freenet
[1:49] * IRCMonkey25 (~chatzilla@pcp02285889pcs.mchncb01.pa.comcast.net) Quit ("Chatzilla 0.9.64e [Mozilla rv:1.7/20040626]")
[2:00] * iip_i2p (~changate@host.teitel.net) has joined #freenet
[2:25] * nextime (~nextime@danex.i-m-c.it) has joined #freenet
[3:25] * tyesinclair (~tyesincla@170.252.64.1) has joined #freenet
[3:38] * Tril (tril@bespin.org) has joined #freenet
[3:58] * aum (~aum@port-204-54-210.fastadsl.net.nz) has joined #freenet
[4:11] * IRCMonkey25 (~chatzilla@pcp02285889pcs.mchncb01.pa.comcast.net) has joined #freenet
[4:12] <IRCMonkey25> is anyone here?
[4:12] <IRCMonkey25> hello?
[4:19] * IRCMonkey25 (~chatzilla@pcp02285889pcs.mchncb01.pa.comcast.net) Quit ("Chatzilla 0.9.64e [Mozilla rv:1.7/20040626]")
[4:19] * freedom15 (~chatzilla@pcp02285889pcs.mchncb01.pa.comcast.net) has joined #freenet
[4:23] * freedom15 (~chatzilla@pcp02285889pcs.mchncb01.pa.comcast.net) has left #freenet
[4:25] * freedom15_ (~chatzilla@pcp02285889pcs.mchncb01.pa.comcast.net) has joined #freenet
[4:25] <freedom15_> /msg nickserv link freedom15 free4chat
[4:27] <freedom15_> is anis anyone there?
[4:28] <freedom15_> *is anyone there?
[4:28] <freedom15_> there is this long list of people on thee channel, but are any of you actually here?
[4:36] <Ash-Foxeus> Nope
[4:37] <Ash-Foxeus> It isn't a list of people, it's a list of abandoned IRC clients.. After the CIA broke into each of their houses and killed one by one
[4:39] <Ash-Foxeus> They were a threat to national security
[4:54] <freedom15_> can you help me with freenet?
[4:54] <freedom15_> no....
[4:54] <freedom15_> The CIA would have taken their computers
[4:56] * joltrushsoon (josh@mir.stevecole.org) has joined #freenet
[4:57] <freedom15_> welcome jolt
[5:09] * verl (~verlverl@h165n2fls33o877.telia.com) has joined #freenet
[5:10] <freedom15_> hi verl
[5:12] * tyesinclair (~tyesincla@170.252.64.1) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[5:41] * orasis (~orasis@c-66-41-30-194.mn.client2.attbi.com) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
[5:52] <joltrushsoon> thanks
[6:03] * Hory (~Miranda@81.196.25.110) has joined #FreeNet
[6:18] * xena (~xena@espians.com) Quit (Client Quit)
[6:36] * ticoli (~ticoli@179.254.39-62.rev.gaoland.net) has joined #freenet
[7:16] * tyesinclair (~tyesincla@170.252.64.1) has joined #freenet
[7:29] * tyesinclair (~tyesincla@170.252.64.1) Quit (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer))
[7:31] * ticoli (~ticoli@179.254.39-62.rev.gaoland.net) Quit ("Leaving")
[8:12] * guido^pe (~unknown@dsl-213-023-239-046.arcor-ip.net) has joined #freenet
[8:29] * lostlogic (~lostlogic@node-402418b2.mdw.onnet.us.uu.net) has joined #freenet
[8:31] * lostlogic (~lostlogic@node-402418b2.mdw.onnet.us.uu.net) Quit (Client Quit)
[8:35] * guido^pe (~unknown@dsl-213-023-239-046.arcor-ip.net) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
[8:42] <KenMan> Some More Graphs : http://mywebpages.comcast.net/jkcorson/FreeNet/5090bw.png http://mywebpages.comcast.net/jkcorson/FreeNet/5090c.png
[8:50] * jokern (~virus@213.184.217.12) has left #freenet
[8:53] * greycat (~wooledg@192.35.79.70) has joined #freenet
[9:08] * robilad (~topic@mpiat2313.ag2.mpi-sb.mpg.de) has joined #freenet
[9:56] * aum (~aum@port-204-54-210.fastadsl.net.nz) Quit ()
[10:21] * lolo-laptop (~lostlogic@68.251.84.226) has joined #freenet
[10:32] * interrupt (~chatzilla@64.122.23.213) has joined #freenet
[10:47] * orasis_ (~orasis@c-66-41-30-194.mn.client2.attbi.com) has joined #freenet
[10:55] * Zv2S (~rfc1413@213.146.114.96) Quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
[11:01] * cehteh (foobar@cehteh.homeunix.org) has joined #freenet
[11:22] * moskawa23 (~Miranda@dsl-082-082-224-110.arcor-ip.net) has joined #freenet
[11:40] * moskau23 (~Miranda@dsl-213-023-251-027.arcor-ip.net) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[11:43] * TLF (francisco@101.Red-81-40-113.pooles.rima-tde.net) has joined #freenet
[12:03] * joltrushsoon (josh@mir.stevecole.org) has left #freenet
[12:05] <toad_> hi ppl
[12:05] * toad_ is here
[12:07] <toad_> <benxor> salahx: the 'ipaddress' option, is just the address of my default gateway, or my computer's external IP, or my computer NAT IP, or....?
[12:07] <toad_> <salahx> ipAddress shoudl be your IP as the Internet sees it; if you're behind nat; don't worry, it'll auto-config to the correct value
[12:07] <toad_> shouldn't be necessary to set it
[12:08] <toad_> <Vix-> Anyone around for Freenet support? - me, if you're still here
[12:09] <toad_> <IRCMonkey25> I upgraded to 5090 and now I can't connect to anyone
[12:09] <toad_> <IRCMonkey25> it has a zero in my open connections
[12:09] <toad_> <IRCMonkey25> Then I upgraded to 5091 and it still is zero
[12:09] <toad_> <IRCMonkey25> can someone help me please
[12:09] <toad_> still here?
[12:10] * toad_ (toad@82-32-16-91.cable.ubr03.azte.blueyonder.co.uk) Quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
[12:12] * toad_ (toad@82-32-16-91.cable.ubr03.azte.blueyonder.co.uk) has joined #freenet
[12:13] <toad_> hi
[12:16] <Ash-Foxeus> goodday
[12:16] * Ash-Foxeus is now known as Ash-Fox
[12:21] * TLF (francisco@101.Red-81-40-113.pooles.rima-tde.net) Quit ("http://www.vitaliano.esp.cc || Adi?s a todos y a todas y que les vaya bien.")
[12:32] * |ux (~|ux@82-37-17-24.cable.ubr03.wolv.blueyonder.co.uk) has joined #freenet
[12:34] <|ux> heh toad_ :)
[12:35] <toad_> hi
[12:36] <|ux> as far as i see it, freenet is going well for me
[12:37] <|ux> since the 5089 route check
[12:38] <toad_> cool
[12:47] * |ux (~|ux@82-37-17-24.cable.ubr03.wolv.blueyonder.co.uk) Quit ("Leaving")
[12:55] * guido^pe (~unknown@dsl-213-023-239-046.arcor-ip.net) has joined #freenet
[13:04] * toad_ blech
[13:04] * toad_ is glad that chat is being used for its proper purpose
[13:04] <toad_> and most of this is not spilling over to devl
[13:05] <toad_> or tech (mostly)
[13:05] * fxlxx (~felix@port-212-202-6-61.dynamic.qsc.de) has joined #freenet
[13:06] <toad_> foo
[13:06] <toad_> where was i?
[13:06] <toad_> before I got into political arguments on chat (which I have tried very hard to avoid...)
[13:06] <toad_> ?
[13:06] <fxlxx> hi, i am seek couter-arguments for censorship regarding the sledge hammer childpornography - do you have any texts regarding that?
[13:07] <fxlxx> already read your philosophy section
[13:07] <toad_> fxlxx: I just posted a specific response to Edward something on chat
[13:07] <toad_> there's a flamewar going on re all this at the moment there...
[13:08] <fxlxx> on chat? - is there a log avaible?
[13:08] <toad_> fxlxx: my opinion is, as briefly as possible, that there are significant uses for unrestricted free speech beyond child porn, that it has often historically been useful to publish things anonymously - whistleblowers, the Federalist Papers, and so on - and that there is no competent authority to decide what should and should not be allowed to be said
[13:09] <toad_> fxlxx: yes
[13:09] <toad_> see the web site
[13:09] <toad_> there should be a gmail archive
[13:09] <fxlxx> k thanks
[13:09] <toad_> Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] Showdown at the Freenode Coral
[13:09] <toad_> From: Toad <toad@amphibian.dyndns.org>
[13:09] <toad_> argh not thatr one
[13:09] <toad_> my mail hasn't gone through yet... that's perverse...
[13:10] <fxlxx> i'll find it
[13:10] <toad_> okay
[13:10] <toad_> i hadn't sent it to chat, that was the problem
[13:10] <toad_> i have now
[13:10] <toad_> Resent-From: toad@amphibian.dyndns.org
[13:10] <toad_> To: "Edward J. Huff" <ejhuff@huff20may77.us>
[13:10] <toad_> Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] How to censor your node's content
[13:11] <toad_> of course this does not address the wider issue: "is it morally acceptable to run freenet given that some content I disagree with will be exchanged through my node?"
[13:12] <toad_> many of the arguments are the same as with e.g. the postal system - but many are different because we provide reasonably hard anonymity
[13:13] <toad_> fxlxx: freenet is (or was) used in hostile regimes such as china. that's an extreme example. but even in the west publishing stuff such as the Operating Thetans is very hazardous. Of course there are non-controversial uses for freenet too (unlimited free web hosting e.g.), but that's not really relevant until freenet is a whole lot faster
[13:15] <toad_> fxlxx: the other side of it, for me, has always been the argument that the forces of censorship are on the move and between the War on Terror and the intellectual property mess, where china is today may well be where the US is in a few decades time
[13:17] <toad_> fxlxx: oh, one good one:
[13:17] <toad_> check the Wikipedia entry for Freenet
[13:18] <fxlxx> k
[13:18] <toad_> IIRC that was a pretty good one
[13:19] <toad_> fxlxx: but it does come up from time to time
[13:19] <toad_> on chat, perhaps more than elsewhere... that'd be a good place to look
[13:20] <fxlxx> what do you mean with chat? ml or irc?
[13:20] <fxlxx> or the freenet internal chat?
[13:20] * fxlxx hasn't used freenet
[13:21] <toad_> mailing list
[13:22] * toad_ supposes there are two issues - a) Will MY NODE be used to transmit such filth? and b) Will it make it harder for the police to catch perverts?
[13:22] <fxlxx> true
[13:24] <toad_> c) Will this result in more child abuse? d) What are the mitigating factors i.e. what is the intention, what are the likely non-evil uses? e) Can it be adapted so we can censor some stuff but not other stuff? [no, IMHO] e) Is it worth it?
[13:25] <fxlxx> e) information wants to be free
[13:25] <toad_> that's part of D
[13:27] <toad_> if freenet helps in any way to produce a bloodless revolution in some of the nastiest regimes on earth, for instance, that'd be a big plus on D). and I'm not saying it will - but we have certainly had interest from people living in such places
[13:27] <fxlxx> regarding b) psychoanalytical studies would be interessting - what happens when someone suppresses his or her sexuality
[13:27] * toad_ nods, you mean c) ?
[13:28] <fxlxx> maybe too
[13:28] <fxlxx> i'm not a psychologist - but lets see wikipedia
[13:37] <toad_> hmmm
[13:37] <toad_> I wonder if timeouts cause load explosion... hmmm...
[13:38] <fxlxx> so freenet connections and/or its installers are blocked by the great chinese firewall?
[13:39] <toad_> freenetproject.org is blocked
[13:39] <toad_> freenet connections are harder to identify
[13:39] * spaetz (~spaetz@217-162-197-136.dclient.hispeed.ch) Quit ("Lost terminal")
[13:40] <fxlxx> guessed that
[13:40] <toad_> although right not it's not THAT hard, because we use a few predictable bytes at the beginning of connections :(
[13:40] <toad_> we will fix that... when we get around to it...
[13:41] * |ux (~|ux@82-37-17-24.cable.ubr03.wolv.blueyonder.co.uk) has joined #freenet
[13:41] <|ux> heh cant stay
[13:41] <|ux> just gotta share these stats:
[13:41] <|ux> Connections open (Inbound/Outbound/Limit) 104 (37/67/200)
[13:41] <|ux> Transfers active (Transmitting/Receiving) 369 (6/363)
[13:41] <|ux> Data waiting to be transferred 12 Bytes
[13:41] <|ux> Total amount of data transferred 2,016 MiB
[13:41] <|ux> Current estimated load for rate limiting 405% [Rejecting incoming connections and requests!]
[13:41] <|ux> Reason for load: Load due to thread limit = 405%
[13:41] <|ux> hehe
[13:42] <|ux> (frost) Number of Simultaneous downloads: 60
[13:42] * |ux (~|ux@82-37-17-24.cable.ubr03.wolv.blueyonder.co.uk) Quit (Client Quit)
[13:42] <toad_> heh
[13:43] <toad_> not very helpful if he doesn't say how many threads are used for what :(
[13:48] * jay (jcl@ool-18bf6dac.dyn.optonline.net) has joined #freenet
[13:51] <fxlxx> thanks for all the info toad_ - bye
[13:51] * fxlxx (~felix@port-212-202-6-61.dynamic.qsc.de) Quit ("leaving")
[14:00] * jokern (~virus@213.184.217.12) has joined #freenet
[14:00] <toad_> hi jokern
[14:00] <toad_> were you having problems?
[14:01] <jokern> hi toad_ .. no problems at the moment
[14:03] <jokern> Just watching Olympics opening ser.
[14:04] <toad_> the dumping keys on restart
[14:04] <toad_> do you have clock consistency problems?
[14:04] <mazzanet> wow @ olympics opening ceremony
[14:04] <mazzanet> the 3d projections are interesting
[14:05] <jokern> Nope, clock is udating every 6hours and very minimal diff
[14:05] <toad_> hmmm
[14:05] <toad_> what about temp files?
[14:06] <toad_> do you have a lot in store/temp/ ?
[14:06] <jokern> But I found that 260-270 MB of tmpfiles was deletet
[14:06] <toad_> they were all temp files? ahhhh
[14:06] <toad_> okay
[14:06] <jokern> I hope it wa only temp files,, but 5k keys? Thats alot
[14:07] <toad_> yes, there's a problem there
[14:07] <toad_> there aren't that many in my store/temp in my stable node that's been up for ages with a huge store... hmmm
[14:07] <toad_> were you running frost?
[14:08] <jokern> I could try move /temp outside the store dir
[14:08] <toad_> jokern: wouldn't make any diff...
[14:08] <jokern> Nope , no frost only node at that time
[14:09] <jay> olympics aren't on my tv so im watching Au vs. Nz Rugby
[14:09] <jokern> It had an uptime 3 days+ and had moved 15-16 Gig so no wonder about lots of tempfiles I guess?
[14:09] <toad_> jokern: no, it shouldn't leak
[14:10] <jokern> hrmf , agree with me for once :)
[14:10] <jay> fcplib leaks a couple of tempfiles atm
[14:11] * toad_ wonders what causes waited more than 120000ms in NIOIS.read()'s
[14:13] <jay> my 5091 node burped some nasty output yesterday
[14:14] <jay> #@!
[14:14] <mazzanet> heh
[14:14] <mazzanet> "russian national anthem - tiesto remix"
[14:14] <jay> %logRotate=false but Fred deletes my logfile on restart no matter what?
[14:14] <jay> mazzanet: heh
[14:15] <jay> %logOverwrite=true
[14:15] <jay> ah
[14:16] <toad_> :)
[14:26] <jokern> psuccess Max: 0.08181818 --average 0.06
[14:27] <toad_> that's good
[15:12] * spaetz (~spaetz@217-162-197-136.dclient.hispeed.ch) has joined #freenet
[15:33] * Hory (~Miranda@81.196.25.110) Quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
[15:46] * toad_ hopes he hasn't put the new guy on devl off freenet forever by systematically debunking all his ideas...
[15:53] * toad_ commits 60195, all minor fixes...
[15:55] <freedom15_> toad_ I am IRCMonkey25. I changed my nick and registered it
[15:55] <freedom15_> just got back
[15:56] <freedom15_> in reference to: toad_ <Vix-> Anyone around for Freenet support? - me, if you're still here
[15:57] <freedom15_> toad_ <IRCMonkey25> I upgraded to 5090 and now I can't connect to anyone
[15:57] <freedom15_> toad_ <IRCMonkey25> it has a zero in my open connections
[15:57] <freedom15_> toad_ <IRCMonkey25> Then I upgraded to 5091 and it still is zero
[15:57] <toad_> yup
[15:57] <toad_> okay
[15:57] <toad_> got it working?
[15:57] <freedom15_> no
[15:57] <toad_> did you forget to reseed?
[15:57] <freedom15_> reseed?
[15:58] <toad_> you need to reseed when going from 5088 or earlier to 5089 or later
[15:58] <toad_> did you do so?
[15:58] <freedom15_> what is reseed?
[15:58] <toad_> stop node
[15:58] <freedom15_> yes
[15:58] <toad_> download http://freenetproject.org/snapshots/seednodes.ref over your seednodes.ref
[15:59] <toad_> start node
[15:59] <freedom15_> ok
[16:02] * guido^pe (~unknown@dsl-213-023-239-046.arcor-ip.net) Quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
[16:03] * EVIL_JOKER (EVILJOKER@80-219-248-121.dclient.hispeed.ch) has joined #freenet
[16:04] <EVIL_JOKER> hi mi freenet is very slow ! waht can i make?
[16:06] * EVIL_JOKER (EVILJOKER@80-219-248-121.dclient.hispeed.ch) Quit (Client Quit)
[16:07] <freedom15_> thank you toad_. that fixed it. I am back to running freenet.
[16:08] <toad_> freedom15_: it ought to automatically reseed after the updater updated the seednodes
[16:08] <toad_> hmm odd
[16:09] <freedom15_> In the week that I wasn't running freenet, I uploaded ~3gigs for mandrake 10.0 with BT.
[16:09] <freedom15_> back to giving bandwidth to Freenet
[16:09] <freedom15_> yes
[16:15] * guido^pe (~unknown@dsl-213-023-232-206.arcor-ip.net) has joined #freenet
[16:22] <jokern> guido :) That nick reminds me of old times when running Opus bbs.
[16:25] <jokern> toad_: 22:39:29 Not our NoStoreData: freenet.node.states.request.NoStoreData@1 ?
[16:36] * Ash-Fox (Hal-9000@aae52.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl) Quit (Nick collision from services.)
[16:36] * Ash-Foxeus (Hal-9000@abd202.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl) has joined #FreeNET
[16:48] * greycat (~wooledg@192.35.79.70) Quit ("Lick Bush in '04")
[16:52] * jay (jcl@ool-18bf6dac.dyn.optonline.net) Quit ("Client exiting")
[16:53] * jay (jcl@ool-18bf6dac.dyn.optonline.net) has joined #freenet
[16:53] <jay> #!@'n kde
[16:55] <jay> random keyboard-dies-and-is-fixed-on-X-restart error
[16:59] * TLF (francisco@83.Red-81-40-116.pooles.rima-tde.net) has joined #freenet
[17:02] <cehteh> noone forces you to use KDE or? :)
[17:05] <jay> it happens every few months which is hardly a reason to switch
[17:06] <jay> cehteh: which is why i switched from gnome
[17:07] <lolo-laptop> Desktop Shells are for luzers ...
[17:08] <lolo-laptop> Openbox3
[17:09] <jay> whatever
[17:09] <lolo-laptop> *grin*
[17:09] <jay> troll
[17:09] <jay> i dont give a shit what anyone uses or even what i use
[17:09] <lolo-laptop> haha
[17:09] <jay> as long as i can code on it
[17:10] <jay> i still use qmail, procmail, etc. under the desktop
[17:10] <jay> so i don't actually *need* kde
[17:10] <jay> everything works on console
[17:11] <lolo-laptop> That's my point... why have all the memory overhead of of something you don't really use?
[17:11] <cehteh> ion here :)
[17:11] <jay> i have 1G of ram
[17:11] <jay> dude i used to run 32K programs on 8-bit ataris
[17:11] <jay> i don't mind 'wasting' ram nowadays
[17:12] <jay> and the kde desktop does the job
[17:12] <lolo-laptop> I do too, but I also usually have netbeans + one other IDE + mozilla + a java app or 3 running, so there is no need to feed 50M to kde
[17:12] <lolo-laptop> *shrug* to each their own, I just like to pimp Openbox3 because I really like it.
[17:12] <jay> ok i run xchat, kmail, knode, frost, freenet, mozilla, xmms all on a daily basis
[17:12] <jay> and kde of course
[17:13] <jay> and ive never come close to using it all up
[17:13] <jay> never used openbox
[17:13] <jay> and i rip cd's with grip.. the thing works well for me
[17:14] <lolo-laptop> netbeans alone is using 175M right now... java is memory hogging... it hurts.
[17:14] <jay> ill just throw more ram at it if i need to ;)
[17:14] <lolo-laptop> heh
[17:14] <lolo-laptop> ok
[17:14] <jay> netbeans and jbuilder are pigs
[17:14] <jay> but most java apps hog mem ;)
[17:14] <lolo-laptop> eclipse uses more memory, IIRC
[17:14] <lolo-laptop> yeah
[17:14] <jay> i use emacs
[17:14] <lolo-laptop> as of java 1.4, raw calculation speed is about the same in java as in compiled languages, but the memory footprint, oh the memory footprint
[17:15] <lolo-laptop> emacs is something I've never learned ... for better or worse
[17:18] <jay> heh
[17:18] <jay> xemacs actually
[17:18] <jay> works just as good remotely too
[17:19] <jay> We must expand our gaze to the future of our great land where we will use our education to pioneer the future and compete with other nations ! We have struggled long and hard at our studies, studying the beautiful History of the wonderful French-Speaking Canadians which inhabit our Nation to the complexities of pre-calculus and our Crushing Defeat of the Soviets in ice-hockey in the 1970s.
[17:19] <jay> (gott's flog)
[17:20] <lolo-laptop> hahahhaahaha
[17:20] <jay> then he threatens christians
[17:21] <lolo-laptop> Threatening Christians seems like a good thing to do.... unless they are toad
[17:21] <lolo-laptop> :-P
[17:21] <jay> you haven't seen my posts on frost?
[17:21] <jay> i sign them with my real name
[17:21] <lolo-laptop> I haven't run frost in nearly a year
[17:22] <jay> ah i thought u were thelostfloppy for a minute
[17:22] <lolo-laptop> newp, I'm lostlogic
[17:22] <jay> ah right on
[17:22] <jay> i used to be hapi
[17:22] <jay> now hapi is a java logbot
[17:22] <lolo-laptop> hehe amusement
[17:23] <lolo-laptop> So what about your posts on frost?
[17:24] <jay> christian related :)
[17:24] <jay> bible debate actually with a satanist
[17:24] <jay> he's quite intelligent
[17:25] <lolo-laptop> well I guessed that... You are on the Christ is our saviour side of it, I take it?
[17:25] <jay> i am now
[17:25] <jay> i wasn't always
[17:26] <jay> at one time i practiced some things (to be vague)
[17:26] <jay> but not anymore
[17:26] <lolo-laptop> hehe, I see
[17:26] <jay> i dont get offended though so spare me :)
[17:26] <jay> i ain't perfect either
[17:27] <lolo-laptop> To be technical I'm a Secular Humanistic Jew... but basically I'm just your generic atheist
[17:27] <jay> i thought i was an athiest at one time
[17:27] <jay> then i quickly became agnostic
[17:28] <jay> i was an athiest after being raised a roman catholic
[17:28] <jay> eheh
[17:28] <lolo-laptop> heh
[17:28] <jay> seriously
[17:28] <lolo-laptop> that happens to a lot of poeple
[17:28] <lolo-laptop> because the catholic church is so broken
[17:28] <jay> yeah i totally undestand
[17:28] <jay> they *are* the problem spoken about in the bible
[17:28] <jay> one of them anyway
[17:29] <lolo-laptop> *chuckle* yeah
[17:29] <jay> sometime people mistaken me for jewish
[17:30] <lolo-laptop> It's funny, I follow most of the Christian moral and ethical codes, because I think they are a good idea, but haven't the slightest inclination to believe in a God or gods of any sort...
[17:30] <jay> not sure why exactly
[17:30] <lolo-laptop> do you have a big nose and curly brown hair?
[17:30] <jay> lolo-laptop: lol yes
[17:30] <lolo-laptop> well that's why people think you are jewish :-P
[17:30] <jay> to your question
[17:30] <jay> heh
[17:30] <jay> that's funny
[17:31] <lolo-laptop> *shrug*
[17:31] <lolo-laptop> anywho, it's time for me to get the hell out of the office ont his friday evening, so I'll see ya round ;-)
[17:31] <jay> i started out like you actually, as far as my ethics go
[17:31] <lolo-laptop> nod
[17:31] <jay> righto
[17:31] <jay> have a good weekend
[17:31] <lolo-laptop> you too :)
[17:31] * lolo-laptop (~lostlogic@68.251.84.226) Quit ("Client exiting")
[17:39] <|UK-Monster|> unstable at 94?
[17:43] * remote-lex (~le@spc1-warr1-3-0-cust198.bagu.broadband.ntl.com) has joined #freenet
[17:43] * Hory (~Miranda@81.196.25.110) has joined #FreeNet
[17:44] * interrupt (~chatzilla@64.122.23.213) Quit ("Chatzilla 0.9.64b [Mozilla rv:1.7/20040707]")
[17:44] <jay> |UK-Monster|: Unstable 60195 is now in CVS. The snapshots will update soon. (Freenet-dev)
[17:45] <remote-lex> k
[17:45] <remote-lex> hmm
[17:45] <remote-lex> munster>
[17:45] <remote-lex> |UK-Monster| ?
[17:45] <remote-lex> hmm
[17:45] * |UK-Monster| is now known as leex-R
[17:45] * xena (~xena@espians.com) has joined #freenet
[17:45] <remote-lex> doadoo
[17:46] * remote-lex is now known as R-leex
[17:46] <R-leex> what it fix
[17:47] <jay> The change in this build is the elimination of all remaining support
[17:47] <jay> for transient nodes. IIRC it didn't make much difference now anyway so
[17:47] <jay> better to get rid of it. </flame>
[17:47] <jay> or read the archive from gmane
[17:48] <leex-R> iirc
[17:48] <leex-R> heh
[17:49] <leex-R> been 2hrs
[17:51] * greycat (rfc1413@wooledge.org) has joined #freenet
[17:52] <toad_> <jokern> toad_: 22:39:29 Not our NoStoreData: freenet.node.states.request.NoStoreData@1 ? - huh?
[17:53] <jay> leex-R: true
[17:55] <R-leex> :)
[17:55] <toad_> <lolo-laptop> To be technical I'm a Secular Humanistic Jew... but basically I'm just your generic atheist - LOL
[17:55] <R-leex> lo toad_
[17:55] <jay> heh
[17:56] <R-leex> fs i broke me 3rd node
[17:56] <toad_> leex-R: that's 95
[17:56] <toad_> there was a 94 too
[17:56] <R-leex> well broke the pc
[17:56] <toad_> R-leex: problems?
[17:56] <toad_> oops :)
[17:56] <R-leex> well if nature can do its wunders it can
[17:56] <R-leex> (lighting)
[17:58] <toad_> still getting quite a few of:
[17:58] <toad_> waited more than 120000ms in NIOIS.read()
[17:58] <toad_> :(
[18:04] <jay> my cat is soo tired
[18:04] <jay> she's sleeping like she fell in that position and died
[18:05] <jay> stomach is going up and down tho so that's good :)
[18:05] <jay> friday is always a slow irc day
[18:05] * TLF (francisco@83.Red-81-40-116.pooles.rima-tde.net) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
[18:06] <R-leex> lo
[18:06] <R-leex> unstable seemts to be working better now
[18:07] * jay (jcl@ool-18bf6dac.dyn.optonline.net) Quit ("bbiab")
[18:07] <R-leex> i get the pics loading on the start page
[18:10] * jay (~jay@ool-18bf6dac.dyn.optonline.net) has joined #freenet
[18:10] <R-leex> wb jay
[18:10] <jay> yay windows
[18:10] <R-leex> lol
[18:12] * TLF (francisco@44.Red-81-40-113.pooles.rima-tde.net) has joined #freenet
[18:14] * jay looks for the Superbike 2000 cd
[18:14] <jay> feel like racing a little
[18:15] <R-leex> is funny http://127.0.0.1:8888/SSK@9G4s~jLQJB7ALQg-v2q5xKAJy9YPAgM/CofE//
[18:16] <R-leex> ?
[18:17] <toad_> huh?
[18:17] <R-leex> saying 5089 is an desaster
[18:17] * Iakin3 (~nb@212.105.104.162) has joined #freenet
[18:18] <Iakin> [00:15] <toad_> still getting quite a few of:
[18:18] <Iakin> [00:15] <toad_> waited more than 120000ms in NIOIS.read()
[18:18] <Iakin> Yes.. please figure out the cause..
[18:18] <toad_> uplink saturation?
[18:18] <Iakin> 97% or so of my log file is filled up by timeout-related messages
[18:18] <Iakin> Hardly
[18:18] <toad_> okay
[18:18] <toad_> which messages exactly?
[18:19] <toad_> and in what proportions?
[18:19] <Iakin> The one you mentioned
[18:19] <toad_> I mean uplink saturation on the sending nodes?
[18:19] <Iakin> And the one 'times out waiting for chunk'
[18:19] <toad_> Iakin: 97% of your log is that exact message?
[18:19] <toad_> ahhh
[18:19] <toad_> okay
[18:19] <toad_> what proportions?
[18:19] <Iakin> w8
[18:19] <toad_> Iakin: the wierd thing is we don't see the other side of it much
[18:20] <toad_> there is a timeout of sorts on sending
[18:20] <toad_> that should trigger when downstream does
[18:20] <toad_> but it doesn't afaics
[18:20] <toad_> suggests a bug in the middle of some sort...
[18:20] <R-leex> intresting log
[18:20] <R-leex> 13-Aug-2004 23:33:32 (freenet.node.states.request.RequestDone, YThread-38, NORMAL): Got ridiculously late freenet.message.DataReply on freenet.node.states.request.RequestDone@17f26bc @ d2701bb4a3bc003d
[18:20] <R-leex> 13-Aug-2004 23:33:33 (freenet.node.states.request.RequestDone, YThread-38, NORMAL): Got ridiculously late freenet.message.DataReply on freenet.node.states.request.RequestDone@17f26bc @ d2701bb4a3bc003d
[18:21] <toad_> R-leex: strange...
[18:21] <toad_> Iakin: what is the chance that ALL of them are caused by nodes going down?
[18:21] <toad_> the transfer bugs/
[18:21] <toad_> ?
[18:21] <toad_> transfers typically take 800 seconds or so on my node...
[18:22] <R-leex> i had about 30/30 transfers
[18:22] <R-leex> i only uploading at 10k
[18:24] <toad_> Connections open (Inbound/Outbound/Limit) 95 (41/54/200)
[18:24] <toad_> Transfers active (Transmitting/Receiving) 82 (75/7)
[18:24] <toad_> woah
[18:24] <toad_> also with a 10kB/sec limit...
[18:24] <toad_> i wonder if all those are real...
[18:25] <Iakin3> out of 8k log messages I have 2200 'timed out waiting for chunk', 40 12000ms messages, 2000 'Other side said...' and 1200 'unrecognized trailer id'
[18:26] <Iakin3> and considering that each of those 2200 messages is accompanied by another related message -> 4400 messages
[18:26] <Iakin3> ...thats about it
[18:26] <Iakin3> [00:40] <toad_> Iakin: what is the chance that ALL of them are caused by nodes going down?
[18:26] <Iakin3> Impossible
[18:27] <toad_> no?
[18:27] <toad_> how many transfers total in that time?
[18:27] <Iakin3> Given that I see so many node that seems to go down after 16405 bytes transfered
[18:27] <toad_> well that's the odd thing
[18:27] <toad_> that DOES NOT HAPPEN on my node
[18:27] <toad_> at least it's not obviously prevalent
[18:28] <Iakin3> Here is a good addition I have made to a logging statement:
[18:28] <Iakin3> Took more than 5 minutes to get next chunk to send (450 seconds):
[18:28] <toad_> 450 seconds is 5 minutes?!
[18:29] <toad_> have you checked that in?
[18:29] <Iakin3> nope
[18:29] <toad_> please do
[18:29] <toad_> if it's just a minor logging change
[18:30] <Iakin3> toad, the number within the paranthesis is the _actual_ time it took until the chunk arrived
[18:30] <toad_> if it took 450 seconds for it to realize that the 300 seconds had gone... then your node is severely CPU overloaded
[18:30] <toad_> isn't it?
[18:30] <toad_> Transfers active (Transmitting/Receiving) 82 (75/7) on a 10kB/sec uplink limit...
[18:30] <toad_> Iakin3: eh?
[18:30] <Iakin3> toad, that timeout it checked whenever a new chunk arrives..
[18:31] <toad_> if it takes more than 300 secs, it stops, right?
[18:31] <Iakin3> Then and only then..
[18:31] <Iakin3> right
[18:31] <toad_> it is cancelled
[18:31] <toad_> it is no longer waiting
[18:31] <toad_> so how does it know when the chunk actually arrives?
[18:31] <Iakin3> it stops wating then.. yes
[18:32] <toad_> so the message is printed when the next chunk actually arrives?
[18:32] <Iakin3> the check is in the 'consumeNewChunk()' method
[18:32] <Iakin3> (or whatever it is named)
[18:32] <toad_> ahhh
[18:32] <toad_> that'd be really interesting, please check it in
[18:32] <Iakin3> Interestingly enough I have quite a few 'Took more than 5 minutes to get next chunk to send (300 seconds):' messages
[18:32] <Iakin3> ok, will do
[18:33] <toad_> Iakin3: sure but they're all tied to a timeout right?
[18:33] <toad_> 160 bytes * 75 transfers = 12000 bytes
[18:33] <toad_> so we should be able to service all the conns in 1.2 seconds...
[18:33] <toad_> even with some overhead it ought to be less than 2 seconds...
[18:34] <Iakin3> committed
[18:34] <toad_> so what is causing this?
[18:35] * toad_ wonders if it's possible to blame it on Frost somehow...
[18:35] <Iakin3> I am tracking another strange thing now
[18:36] <toad_> Iakin3: i have no answers
[18:36] <toad_> i do not know why so many transfers are so dramatically slowed down
[18:36] <Iakin3> in MCH there is a method named forceSendPacket(PPM)
[18:36] <toad_> i think perhaps a testnet would tell me
[18:36] <Iakin3> This one is supposed to send a packet containing that supplied message
[18:36] <toad_> however it might not exhibit realistic traffic, and so it might not happen at all
[18:37] <toad_> Iakin3: it doesn't matter
[18:37] <Iakin3> ..so it asks the PH for a packet containing that message
[18:37] <toad_> Iakin3: it's only called when the MCH is idle
[18:37] <toad_> if the MCH is idle it needs to be told to send a packet
[18:37] <Iakin3> And it is _very_ common that the ph doesn't contain that particular message
[18:37] <toad_> if it isn't, it'll get one when it finishes its last send
[18:37] <toad_> ah
[18:37] <toad_> hmmmmmmmmm
[18:37] <toad_> something is wrong if it doesn't
[18:38] <Iakin3> believe me..
[18:38] <Iakin3> sendingPacket =
[18:38] <Iakin3> peerHandler.getPacket(p, identity, ppm, null, false, true);
[18:38] <Iakin3> if (sendingPacket == null){
[18:38] <Iakin3> if(ppm != null)
[18:38] <Iakin3> Core.logger.log(this, "Asked to send " + ppm + " on " + this + ", but packet did not exist",
[18:38] <Iakin3> Logger.ERROR);
[18:38] <Iakin3> return true;
[18:38] <Iakin3> }
[18:38] <Iakin3> I have 10k entries of that log message in my log
[18:39] <Iakin3> (in addition to those 8k I talked about)
[18:39] <Iakin3> forceSendPacket(ppm) returns true whenever that happens
[18:39] <toad_> Iakin3: that's a race condition
[18:40] <Iakin3> So? Who is consuming the packet?
[18:40] <R-leex> i am starting to get more transfers
[18:40] <toad_> the ONLY way sendingPacket can be null is if we have already completed the send
[18:40] <Iakin3> We only have one MCH per PH
[18:40] <R-leex> at 21 transmitting
[18:40] <Iakin3> toad: No..
[18:40] <Iakin3> it will also be null if we cannot find the packet we are requested to send in the ph..
[18:40] <toad_> hmmm no it can't actually be that...
[18:41] <Iakin3> check MCH.forceSendPacket()
[18:41] <toad_> first we check whether sendingPacket is not equal to null i.e. we are already sending
[18:41] <toad_> we're not
[18:41] <toad_> so we get a packet
[18:41] <toad_> which can't be null unless the message was...
[18:42] * TLF (francisco@44.Red-81-40-113.pooles.rima-tde.net) Quit ("http://www.vitaliano.esp.cc || Adi?s a todos y a todas y que les vaya bien.")
[18:42] <toad_> Iakin3: are you sure the packet wasn't null?
[18:42] <Iakin3> yup..
[18:42] <Iakin3> check what I pasted
[18:42] <Iakin3> heh..
[18:43] <Iakin3> actually I forgot about that situation yesterday..
[18:43] <toad_> well you explain how PH.getPacket could possibly return null if it has a non-null packet to add?
[18:43] <Iakin3> so when I woke up this morning I had 10gigs of 'Asked to send null, but packet did not exist'
[18:43] <toad_> ah i see
[18:43] <toad_> if(canSendRequests || !m.isRequest()) {
[18:43] <toad_> in other words
[18:44] <toad_> we don't send it if it is a request and we're not yet cleared to send requests
[18:44] <toad_> no mystery there
[18:44] <toad_> we get cleared to send requests by PH.enableSendingRequests()
[18:45] <toad_> which is called by IdentifyPacketMessage.execute()
[18:45] <Iakin3> From your comment:
[18:45] <Iakin3> ' * NOTE: very important that the message 'm' is included in the resulting packet,
[18:45] <Iakin3> * if not it will probably be lost!
[18:45] <Iakin3> '
[18:46] <toad_> Iakin3: which is why in my tree we just return true if sendingPacket == null
[18:46] <toad_> Iakin3: well if we don't include it we queue it
[18:46] <toad_> is that so mysterious?
[18:47] <Iakin3> So.. where do the packet go if we return true from forceSendPacket eventhough we didn't send it?
[18:48] <Iakin3> Check ph.innerSendMessageAsync()
[18:48] <Iakin3> if (findResult.conn.forceSendPacket(pm)) {
[18:48] <Iakin3> return; //Sent it!
[18:48] <Iakin3> }
[18:49] <toad_> Iakin3: having said that, we do need to check whether we can send requests in TerminableRouting.freeConn
[18:49] <toad_> but it WILL get sent
[18:49] <Iakin3> else
[18:49] <Iakin3> // No suitable, free, BaseConnectionHandler found. Enqueue the message
[18:49] <Iakin3> if (logDEBUG) Core.logger.log(this, "Queueing " + pm + " on " + this, Logger.DEBUG);
[18:49] <Iakin3> Wherefrom?
[18:49] <Iakin3> We dont enqueue it
[18:49] <Iakin3> We dont send it
[18:50] <toad_> Iakin3: huh?
[18:50] <Iakin3> (in the inverse order)
[18:50] <toad_> Iakin3: if it doesn't get added, then it doesn't get added in PH.innerQueue
[18:50] <toad_> in which case it gets queued
[18:51] <Iakin3> toad, check the code.. PH.innerSendMessageAsync
[18:51] <toad_> the only way it wouldn't get either sent or queued, is if it is null
[18:51] <Iakin3> if mch.forceSendPacket() returns true we _dont_ queue it
[18:51] <toad_> Iakin3: yes, it gets queued elsewhere, in PH.innerQueue
[18:51] <Iakin3> line 737 in my PH
[18:51] <Iakin3> 'return' it says
[18:51] <Iakin3> [01:07] <Iakin3> if (findResult.conn.forceSendPacket(pm)) {
[18:51] <Iakin3> [01:07] <Iakin3> return; //Sent it!
[18:51] <Iakin3> [01:07] <Iakin3>
[18:52] <toad_> yes
[18:52] <toad_> read innerQueue
[18:52] <R-leex> i am getting the waited more than 120000ms in NIOIS.read as well
[18:52] <R-leex> and my node is 1hr old
[18:53] <Iakin3> Ahh..
[18:53] <toad_> Iakin3: you understand?
[18:53] <Iakin3> goddam, that is some hairy code
[18:53] <toad_> :)
[18:53] <Iakin3> Any way of fixing it up?
[18:54] <toad_> i don't know
[18:54] <toad_> any suggestions?
[18:54] * oierw` (mathew@cpe-69-75-112-240.hawaii.rr.com) has joined #freenet
[18:54] <Iakin3> return proper status code from forceSendPAcket?
[18:55] <toad_> Iakin3: do you get much of that message you just committed?
[18:55] <toad_> Iakin3: have to make sure it gets queued one way or the other
[18:55] <Iakin3> Do the canSendRequest check _before_ calling mch.forceSendPacket?
[18:55] <toad_> i suppose... why?
[18:56] <Iakin3> toad, well.. not very many.. others are _much_ more prominent
[18:56] <toad_> it only applies to requests anyway...
[18:56] <toad_> Iakin3: sure, but that one might be important
[18:56] <Iakin3> toad: because then people can follow the code better
[18:56] <toad_> Iakin3: okay, add the check
[18:57] <Iakin3> if you want to I can start doing obscure things such as returning items from methods using exceptions..
[18:57] <toad_> Iakin3: my point...
[18:57] <toad_> Iakin3: LOL
[18:57] <toad_> well, that's been known... :)
[18:57] <Iakin3> that is another way of making things hard to read..
[18:57] <toad_> Iakin3: anyway
[18:57] <Iakin3> code clearness is important
[18:57] <toad_> any idea what the cause is of the "took more than 5 minutes to get next chunk to send" ?
[18:58] <toad_> that is probably the cause of the other timeouts?
[18:58] <Iakin3> No.. I dont think so
[18:58] <toad_> is your cpu constantly saturated?
[18:58] <Iakin3> Nope
[18:58] <toad_> no you don't think what?
[18:58] <Iakin3> that it is a result of those other timeouts
[18:58] <Iakin3> because..
[18:59] <toad_> Iakin3: well, either it is the result of the other timeouts
[18:59] <toad_> or it is the CAUSE of the other timeouts
[18:59] <toad_> i think it's probably the latter
[18:59] <toad_> because if it was the result, we wouldn't get as far as MuxTrailerWriter
[18:59] <Iakin3> I have seen 4 chunks of 4k each arrive in a few seconds.. then a 21 byte chunk right afterwards.. then nothing more for 5 minutes...
[19:00] <Iakin3> then the 'timed out'
[19:00] <toad_> well that's strange in itself, there's no reason for them to arrive as entire 4kB chunks
[19:00] <toad_> Iakin3: which timed out?
[19:00] <Iakin3> 'timed out witing for next chunk'
[19:00] <toad_> on write or on read?
[19:00] <Iakin3> read...
[19:01] <toad_> on write is interesting because it suggests a cause _in the code_, which could be causing all the rest
[19:01] <Iakin3> all of those messages are read-related
[19:01] <toad_> it's something we can actually debug instead of groaning about
[19:01] <Iakin3> all of those 'timed out waiting for next chunk'
[19:01] <toad_> Iakin3: the message in MuxTrailerWriter is on WRITE
[19:01] <toad_> and according to what you showed above, it's WAY after the read timeout would have happened
[19:01] <toad_> therefore it's not caused by the read timeouts
[19:02] <toad_> therefore IT IS THE CAUSE
[19:02] <toad_> or at least one of them
[19:02] <toad_> so find one of THOSE messages, and find out what was happening to the thing that was supposed to be writing to it
[19:03] <toad_> surely this makes some kind of sense?
[19:03] <Iakin3> yea yea.. every 'Timed out waiting for chunk' message is related to reading of chunks
[19:03] <Iakin3> the writing problem logs some other string
[19:04] <toad_> Iakin3: I'm interested in the writing problem
[19:04] <toad_> you said you get them
[19:04] <toad_> you showed one where it had taken 450 seconds to get a chunk to write
[19:04] <toad_> despite the fact that it only takes 300 seconds for the read side to time out!
[19:05] <toad_> something is wrong ON THE WRITE SIDE
[19:05] <toad_> that means it's something we might possibly be able to debug
[19:05] <toad_> now it's possible that your CPU was maxxed out and it was a read error that was severely delayed
[19:05] <toad_> but it'd be really useful to find out
[19:06] <Iakin3> toad, I have a dual Athlon MP 2200+ on a 2MBit/s connection
[19:07] <Iakin3> I _doesn't_ saturate..
[19:07] <toad_> okay
[19:07] <toad_> that rules out it being due to a cpu spike... well mostly it does anyway
[19:07] <toad_> therefore it's a bug
[19:07] <toad_> great, we can fix it
[19:07] <Iakin3> [01:23] <toad_> you showed one where it had taken 450 seconds to get a chunk to write
[19:07] <Iakin3> [01:23] <toad_> despite the fact that it only takes 300 seconds for the read side to time out!
[19:07] <Iakin3> Yea.. thats right
[19:07] <Iakin3> Now, another question..
[19:08] <toad_> Iakin3: well, that's where you need to focus
[19:08] <toad_> what causes THOSE messages?
[19:08] <toad_> i don't get enough of them to make much headway
[19:08] <Iakin3> When we _dont_ send a message using forceSendPacket().. when will MCH come around to call getPacket() the next time?
[19:09] <Iakin3> When the _next_ message arrives or?
[19:09] <toad_> Iakin3: easy, you are using eclipse aren't you? "Open call hierarchy" :)
[19:09] <Iakin3> grr
[19:09] <toad_> its when it finishes sending the previous message
[19:09] <toad_> which can take considerable time
[19:09] <toad_> s/message/packet
[19:10] <Iakin3> toad: If we didn't send the request..
[19:10] * oierw (mathew@cpe-69-75-112-240.hawaii.rr.com) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[19:10] <Iakin3> we wont have a previous message..
[19:10] <Iakin3> therefore no call to 'jobDone'
[19:11] <Iakin3> Makes sense?
[19:11] * Hory (~Miranda@81.196.25.110) Quit ("Miranda IM! Smaller, Faster, Easier. http://miranda-im.org")
[19:11] <Iakin3> Hehe.. maybe you have already implemented the queueing scheme ;)
[19:12] <toad_> okay
[19:12] <toad_> if we didn't send the request, because we are not currently cleared to send requests
[19:12] <toad_> then when we do get cleared, PH.enableSendRequests() or whatever it is
[19:13] <toad_> enableSendingRequests
[19:13] <toad_> canSendRequests = true;
[19:13] <toad_> // Try to send something
[19:13] <toad_> innerSendMessageAsync(null);
[19:13] <toad_> see?
[19:13] <Iakin> toad: Yup..
[19:14] <Iakin> But first I'll clean up the mess..
[19:14] <toad_> Iakin: so as soon as we get their Identify, we send the request(s)
[19:14] <toad_> so no, the scenario you suggested does not happen
[19:16] <Iakin3> Hmm... do we get identify's in the middle of a connections lifetime?
[19:16] <toad_> no, as I said we can't send any requests until we receive the identify
[19:16] <toad_> it's supposed to be more or less the first message
[19:16] * toad_ looks at logs...
[19:16] <toad_> To
[19:16] <toad_> ok more than 5 minutes to get next chunk to send:
[19:17] <toad_> got one, but it happens right after a timeout on read
[19:17] <toad_> and is clearly caused by it
[19:17] <toad_> of course it doesn't say how long it took...
[19:17] <Iakin3> toad, but 'canSendRequests' fluctuates in the middle of a connections lifetime I assume
[19:17] <toad_> Iakin3: no
[19:17] <Iakin3> No?
[19:17] <toad_> if we lose all our conns, it gets turned off
[19:17] <toad_> otherwise it's enabled when we Identify
[19:17] <toad_> that's it
[19:18] <toad_> check the source if you don't believe me
[19:18] <Iakin3> Hmm.. maybe it should be named canSendMessages or something?
[19:18] <toad_> no
[19:19] <toad_> because it only affects requests
[19:19] <toad_> there's no reason to make it block other messages
[19:19] <Iakin3> Can we send other messages before we have gotten the ID..
[19:19] <Iakin3> Aha..
[19:20] <toad_> woah
[19:20] <toad_> going through my stable logs...
[19:20] <toad_> no NORMAL or ERROR messages at all between 10:12 and 10:24
[19:20] <toad_> then an estimator format exception at 10:24, and a couple of MRI violations...
[19:20] <Iakin3> Soo.. how can I have 10k of that situation then..
[19:20] <toad_> Iakin3: which situation?
[19:21] <toad_> hmmm lots of MRI violations...
[19:21] <Iakin3> As I said before.. I have 10k log messages talking about 'asked to send message X but getPacket returned null'
[19:22] <Iakin3> And since that is caused by canSendRequests==false..
[19:22] <toad_> Iakin3: are all these messages requests/
[19:22] <toad_> ?
[19:22] <toad_> HighLevelPeerPacketMessage...DataRequest/InsertRequest ?
[19:22] <Iakin3> Right.. they seem to be HLPPM's
[19:22] <toad_> Iakin3: are they Request's?
[19:23] <toad_> what's your connection flux in that time?
[19:23] <Iakin3> Good question..
[19:23] <toad_> okay, these MRI violations are getting irritating...
[19:23] <Iakin3> No idea
[19:23] <toad_> there are diagnostics on it...
[19:24] <Iakin3> Yea, but I am in the middle of a debugging session
[19:24] <Iakin3> w8, I''ll look
[19:24] <toad_> authorizeTime
[19:24] <toad_> observations
[19:24] <toad_> what period does this log cover?
[19:24] <Iakin3> MEybe we shuoldn't even try to route to a peer which has 'canSendRequests==false'?
[19:24] <toad_> Iakin3: yes, I know
[19:24] <toad_> I just added that code
[19:25] <toad_> 5 mins ago :)
[19:25] <toad_> I am going to have to go to bed soon
[19:25] <toad_> but I want to clear up any misunderstandings here leading you up blind alleys
[19:25] <Iakin3> about 200 autorizetime/24 hours
[19:25] <toad_> log covers 24 hours?
[19:26] <toad_> 200 occurrences or 200ms average?
[19:26] <Iakin3> Well.. 12 maybe
[19:26] <Iakin3> Obervations
[19:26] <Iakin3> http://localhost:9888/servlet/nodestatus/diagnostics/authorizeTime/day
[19:26] <toad_> okay
[19:26] <mazzanet> toad_
[19:26] <toad_> i thought you said you had 10k log messages TOTAL ?
[19:27] <toad_> mazzanet:
[19:27] <mazzanet> your post on the lists re. updater
[19:27] <mazzanet> that was me
[19:27] <toad_> mazzanet: re what?
[19:28] <Iakin> toad: no, I had 8k logmessages + 10k of these
[19:28] <Iakin> I left out those 10k in our initial conversation
[19:28] <mazzanet> "I thought I heard somebody talking about writing it lately, that's all."
[19:28] <toad_> Iakin: ahh
[19:28] <toad_> i see...
[19:28] <toad_> Iakin: well ignore it for now, I'll commit code to not consider them for routing until they're cleared to send requests
[19:29] * guido^pe (~unknown@dsl-213-023-232-206.arcor-ip.net) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
[19:30] * toad_ committing... with some other minor fixes...
[19:30] <toad_> committed 60196
[19:31] <toad_> Iakin: committed, suggest you update
[19:31] <Iakin3> ok
[19:31] <toad_> Iakin: are all the write timeout messages like that?
[19:31] <toad_> i.e. do they all have REALLY long times?
[19:31] <toad_> much longer than 300 secs?
[19:31] <toad_> what about the receive timeouts/
[19:31] <toad_> ?
[19:32] <toad_> are they longer than 300 secs?
[19:32] <toad_> are there write timeouts that don't correspond to read timeouts?
[19:33] * jay (~jay@ool-18bf6dac.dyn.optonline.net) Quit (".")
[19:33] <toad_> if all the write timeouts correspond to read timeouts, then they don't tell you much, everything happens on other nodes
[19:33] <Iakin3> toad: Yup
[19:33] <toad_> but if there are write timeouts that DON'T, you're in business
[19:33] <toad_> Iakin3: how do you know?
[19:33] <Iakin3> some 450.. and I think I saw one up to 1800
[19:34] <toad_> Iakin3: how do you explain the 450?
[19:34] <toad_> or even the 1800?
[19:34] <Iakin3> No idea
[19:34] <toad_> that's SECONDS, not millis...
[19:34] <toad_> Iakin3: aaaargh
[19:34] <Iakin3> I assumed it was a very late trailerchunk that arrived
[19:34] <toad_> and of course you don't have detailed enough logs to find out
[19:34] <Iakin3> no?e
[19:34] <toad_> Iakin3: no, that can't happen
[19:34] <Iakin3> But it _is_ repeatable
[19:34] <toad_> Iakin3: if the receive side times out, it will terminate the send side
[19:34] <toad_> it's repeatable on your node
[19:34] <toad_> :(
[19:35] <Iakin3> I also have some of these
[19:35] <toad_> Iakin3: what are your messageSendTime's?
[19:36] * oierw` (mathew@cpe-69-75-112-240.hawaii.rr.com) Quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
[19:36] <toad_> my messageSendTimeTrailerChunk is pretty low but peaks at 100 seconds or so...
[19:36] <toad_> no, 400 seconds...
[19:37] <jokern> ughmm, fuqid died
[19:38] * toad_ supposes the high times are exclusively caused by people running fuqid et al and saturating their downlink?
[19:38] <toad_> thus slowing down chunks for the rest of the network, perhaps?
[19:38] * oierw` (mathew@cpe-69-75-112-240.hawaii.rr.com) has joined #freenet
[19:39] * oierw` (mathew@cpe-69-75-112-240.hawaii.rr.com) Quit (Remote closed the connection)
[19:39] * oierw` (mathew@cpe-69-75-112-240.hawaii.rr.com) has joined #freenet
[19:39] <toad_> but then routing ought to avoid such nodes...
[19:39] <toad_> except that thanks to rate limiting it doesn't have much chance to...
[19:39] <toad_> any more than it can route to "good" nodes...
[19:39] * R-leex (~le@spc1-warr1-3-0-cust198.bagu.broadband.ntl.com) Quit (niven.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
[19:39] * Iakin3 (~nb@212.105.104.162) Quit (niven.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
[19:39] * moskawa23 (~Miranda@dsl-082-082-224-110.arcor-ip.net) Quit (niven.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
[19:39] * iip_i2p (~changate@host.teitel.net) Quit (niven.freenode.net irc.freenode.net)
[19:40] * R-leex (~le@spc1-warr1-3-0-cust198.bagu.broadband.ntl.com) has joined #freenet
[19:40] * Iakin3 (~nb@212.105.104.162) has joined #freenet
[19:40] * moskawa23 (~Miranda@dsl-082-082-224-110.arcor-ip.net) has joined #freenet
[19:40] * iip_i2p (~changate@host.teitel.net) has joined #freenet
[19:41] <R-leex> ffs
[19:41] <R-leex> nice netsplit
[19:42] <toad_> Iakin3: I think a lot of the timeouts in transfers are caused by the following:
[19:42] <toad_> 1. Rate limiting causes routing to suck
[19:42] <toad_> 2. Routing sucks => routing can't work around nodes that often fail transfers. Also, we'll route to them occasionally ANYWAY...
[19:43] <toad_> 3. Nodes run FUQID, local requests are not currently effectively limited. So they saturate their downstream.
[19:43] <toad_> this explains the very high peak messageSendTimeTrailerChunk's I see
[19:43] <Iakin> toad: That doesn't explain the 16405's
[19:43] <toad_> Iakin: which don't happen for me
[19:43] <Iakin> But here ;)
[19:44] <toad_> well, you can investigate them then
[19:44] <toad_> do you get many of the got-trailerchunk-out-of-sequence messages?
[19:44] <Iakin> toad, you say messageSendTimeTrailerChunk
[19:44] <toad_> yes... i do...?
[19:44] <Iakin> what about RecieveTimeTrailerChunk..
[19:44] <toad_> well there's no such diagnostic at present
[19:45] <Iakin> downstream bw usually isn't a problem for people
[19:45] <Iakin> I know there there isn't..
[19:45] <Iakin> but the argument still holds..
[19:45] <toad_> Iakin: if your node is saturated by FUQID or Frost, downstream bandwidth is a problem
[19:45] <toad_> and that's the only way to explain the absurd send times
[19:45] <toad_> the average is very low
[19:45] <Iakin> SendTime should only be affected if _your_ node runs FUQID, right?
[19:45] <toad_> but the peaks... are REALLY high
[19:45] <toad_> no
[19:46] <Iakin> Your SendTime that is?
[19:46] <Iakin> no?
[19:46] <toad_> send time is affected if the target node's DOWNLINK is saturated
[19:46] <Iakin> Because we await a chunk fully?
[19:46] <Iakin> toad: Yea
[19:46] <Iakin> that was what I meant..
[19:46] <toad_> because if their downlink is saturated, it takes us ages to send to them
[19:46] <Iakin> but how common is _that_?
[19:46] <toad_> i think it's probably very common for people who actually USE freenet
[19:47] <Iakin> pft..
[19:47] <toad_> 1MB chunks are 50% of the keys on freenet...
[19:47] <Iakin> that I can hardly believe..
[19:47] <toad_> check your datastore histogram
[19:47] <Iakin> I have a very hard time believeing that anyone actually manages to locate them in the network
[19:47] <toad_> 1k |
[19:47] <toad_> 2k |==================
[19:47] <toad_> 4k |===================
[19:47] <toad_> 8k |===
[19:47] <toad_> 16k |=
[19:47] <toad_> 32k |=
[19:48] <toad_> 64k |=
[19:48] <toad_> 128k |=
[19:48] <toad_> 256k |===================
[19:48] <toad_> 512k |===========
[19:48] <toad_> 1M |================================================================
[19:48] <Iakin> My node usually cannot even locate TFE's initial page..
[19:48] <toad_> Iakin: the gigasharers, as CofE and others grumble about them...
[19:48] <toad_> well, I think that may have something to do with the failure table :)
[19:48] <Iakin> ...usualy due to RNF's
[19:48] <Iakin> :)
[19:48] <toad_> it's just a matter of keeping on and on and on hammering it
[19:49] <toad_> which FUQID and Frost do pretty well
[19:49] <Iakin> But come on, do you really believe what you are saying.. or are you in an arguing-against-me-mood
[19:50] <toad_> there are 15,496 keys of ~1MB in my store, and 18,950 keys of less than 1MB
[19:50] <toad_> now, I have requested a few big files and inserted a few big files
[19:50] <toad_> but not enough to make a dent in THAT
[19:50] <toad_> Iakin: I'm trying to explain the high peak send times, and the timeouts
[19:51] <toad_> it could certainly explain the timeouts
[19:51] <toad_> so yes, i believe it, as a credible hypothesis
[19:52] <toad_> in which case the solution is to bring client requests under the control of rate limiting properly
[19:52] <toad_> which will be partly helped by queueing
[19:52] <Iakin> uptime 6 minutes, 14 'timed out waiting for next chunk in TrailerReader...'
[19:52] <toad_> Iakin: and any on send?
[19:52] <Iakin> w8
[19:53] <Iakin> 1
[19:53] <toad_> can that be tied to a receive?
[19:53] <Iakin> w8
[19:54] <toad_> receive timeout i mean
[19:54] <toad_> ?
[19:54] <Iakin> Yup
[19:54] <Iakin> One of those 14
[19:54] <toad_> it's caused by the receive timeout?
[19:54] <toad_> ok
[19:55] <toad_> so that doesn't tell us anything...
[19:55] <R-leex> i find it intresing the 1gb+
[19:55] <Iakin> and it was exactly 300 second
[19:55] <Iakin> s
[19:55] <toad_> Iakin: what do you think the problem is?
[19:55] <toad_> R-leex: 1gb+?
[19:55] <R-leex> not to rueeo its at 0
[19:55] <Iakin> That the code is forgetting messages or something
[19:55] <R-leex> just it been there is intresting
[19:55] <Iakin> dropping them or so..
[19:56] <toad_> where?
[19:56] <toad_> on the receive or the send side?
[19:56] <toad_> well, occasionally it does
[19:56] <toad_> we KNOW that
[19:56] <toad_> because occasionally we get the trailer packet out of order error
[19:56] <Iakin> I think on the send side..
[19:57] <Iakin> I have read all the recieving code over and over again
[19:57] <Iakin> there is nothing wrong that I can see
[19:58] <Iakin> Seems like your recent dont route to nodes we cannot send request to works pretty well
[19:58] <Iakin> None of those messages in the log yet
[19:58] <toad_> Iakin: do you get "Got a trailer chunk ahead of our time" ?
[19:58] * jokern (~virus@213.184.217.12) has left #freenet
[19:59] <toad_> ever? often?
[19:59] <toad_> that would be the logical symptom if you are correct
[19:59] <Iakin> toad, is there any way of seeing how many of the open connections that haven't yet delivered an Identify
[19:59] <Iakin> toad, not in this session yet
[19:59] <Iakin> But I had a few in the previous session
[19:59] <toad_> Iakin: not iirc..
[20:00] <Iakin> toad, interestingly enough I saw at least on batch of three such messages in the log
[20:00] <toad_> well we COULD implement a retransmission system
[20:00] <Iakin> dont know why they appeared all at the same time though
[20:00] <toad_> Iakin: suggests it has something to do with connection closing?
[20:00] <toad_> or some other major event?
[20:00] <toad_> losing one on conn close is quite possible...
[20:00] <Iakin> toad: Better find the bug first..
[20:00] <toad_> if it's possible to find the bug
[20:01] <toad_> it was better to get rid of the monolithic store and write the new one than to try to find the bug(s) in the monolithic store
[20:01] <toad_> sometimes it just works that way
[20:01] <Iakin> 25 'timed out waiting for next chunk in TrailerReader...' now
[20:02] <toad_> or perhaps our energy is best focussed on getting fixed key sizes out
[20:02] <toad_> but can't really do that without premix routing
[20:02] <toad_> and it'd be fairly monstrous anyway..
[20:03] <R-leex> nickleex-ZZzz
[20:03] * R-leex is now known as leex-ZZzz
[20:03] <leex-ZZzz> ..
[20:03] <Iakin> 7 'waited more than..'
[20:03] * leex-ZZzz (~le@spc1-warr1-3-0-cust198.bagu.broadband.ntl.com) Quit ("if time was infant freenet is more then real")
[20:03] <toad_> Iakin: it sounds to me like it's not a bug
[20:03] <toad_> it's some sort of actual low level timeout
[20:03] <toad_> at some point a node's link is saturated
[20:04] <toad_> otherwise we'd have at least a ratio of 1:20 Got a trailer chunk ahead of our time : other timeouts
[20:04] <toad_> whereas in practice it's really rare
[20:04] * leex-R is now known as leex-ZZz
[20:04] <leex-ZZz> nn
[20:04] <toad_> but the only way you're going to get anywhere is if you can reproduce it in controlled conditions...
[20:04] <leex-ZZz> hope you find the bug
[20:04] <toad_> e.g. on a localtestnet...
[20:04] <leex-ZZz> or fix
[20:05] <Iakin> Here's an interesting thing
[20:05] <toad_> or a proper testnet
[20:05] <toad_> (pigs will fly!)
[20:05] <toad_> Iakin: hmm?
[20:05] <Iakin> 7 minutes after one of those 'Timed out waiting for next chunk' messages..
[20:05] <Iakin> ..the missing chunks came..
[20:06] <toad_> Iakin: SEVEN MINUTES ?!?!?!
[20:06] <toad_> that's insane
[20:06] <Iakin> and caused 10 or so 'unrecognized trailer id'
[20:06] <toad_> they haven't been delayed by canSendRequests
[20:06] * Iakin3 (~nb@212.105.104.162) Quit (Excess Flood)
[20:06] <toad_> because they're not requests
[20:06] <toad_> they have been delayed by somebody's link being saturated
[20:07] <toad_> Iakin: here?
[20:07] <Iakin> yup
[20:08] <toad_> Iakin: so we have ruled out packets being dropped
[20:08] <Iakin> After 7 minutes.. the next 10 chunks arrived within 1 second
[20:08] <Iakin> ;)
[20:08] <toad_> they have in fact merely been severely delayed
[20:08] <toad_> well, 10 chunks is like 2kB
[20:08] <toad_> no big deal :)
[20:09] <toad_> since 5088 or so, we've had 1 trailer chunk ~= 1 padding chunk
[20:09] <toad_> temporary CPU spike perhaps?
[20:10] <toad_> every so often somebody reports that happening...
[20:10] <Iakin> I got 1600 chunks of that trailer within something between 1 and 10 minutes..
[20:10] <toad_> the node goes to 100% CPU for a while for no good reason
[20:10] <Iakin> then nothing for 5 minutes -> timeout
[20:10] <Iakin> Then 10 more after 7 more minutes
[20:10] <Iakin> But maybe that example was one of those _valid_ ones ;)
[20:11] <toad_> valid whats?
[20:12] <Iakin> A valid timeout situation..
[20:12] <toad_> none of this would be happening, imho, if we weren't taking such an insanely long time to transfer the files...
[20:12] <toad_> Iakin: huh?
[20:13] <toad_> as opposed to what?
[20:13] <Iakin> Maybe the trailer/chunk situation I outlined above was an example of something the worked as supposed to
[20:13] <toad_> an invalid timeout situation?
[20:13] <Iakin> right
[20:13] <toad_> well i still think there's some saturation going on somewhere along the chain
[20:14] <Iakin> Hmm.. I also have an State does not recieve TransferReply <- DataInsert
[20:14] <toad_> state does not receive
[20:14] <toad_> DataInsert
[20:14] <toad_> in TransferReply ?
[20:14] <Iakin> Sometimes it seems to me like messages randomly goes into states
[20:14] <Iakin> yup
[20:14] <toad_> that's just noise, i'll add a handler sometime...
[20:15] <toad_> no, messages don't RANDOMLY go into states
[20:15] <toad_> what happens is that the messages are so absurdly late as to be meaningless
[20:15] * Iakin5 (~nb@212.105.104.162) has joined #freenet
[20:15] <toad_> e.g. ridiculously late DataReply in RequestDone
[20:15] <Iakin5> Aug 14, 2004 2:17:28 AM (freenet.node.states.request.TransferReply, YThread-44, ERROR): State does not receive: freenet.message.DataInsert@24746a DataInsert @freenet.MuxConnectionHandler@d6e551 MuxConnectionHandler[conn=[tcp/connection: 3787>218.185.133.241:28937,freenet.transport.tcpConnection@12d92d7], link=[freenet.session.FnpLink@103a27c], p=[freenet.presentation.MuxProtocol@4983d8], identity=[DSA(ad5e 27e9 f4da 1b29 7bed d4bf 00f9 1825 212a 198a)], sock=
[20:16] <toad_> that also convinces me that there are saturated links or saturated CPUs, somewhere along the line...
[20:16] <mazzanet> oh yay
[20:16] <mazzanet> i can't send mail to the lists
[20:16] <Iakin> But is a DataInsert in _some_ way related to a TransferReply state?
[20:16] <toad_> mazzanet: eek
[20:17] <mazzanet> because my current ip has been marked as a major open proxy
[20:17] <toad_> Iakin: it might be; inserts can turn into requests
[20:17] <mazzanet> *sigh*
[20:17] <toad_> mazzanet: is it?
[20:17] <mazzanet> no
[20:17] <toad_> mazzanet: we turned off SORBS
[20:17] <mazzanet> my isp has dynamic ips
[20:17] <toad_> because it arbitrarily blocked all DSL IPs
[20:18] <mazzanet> "<devl@freenetproject.org>: 212.13.198.248 does not like recipient. Remote host said: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [203.217.37.137] blocked using list.dsbl.org; http://dsbl.org/listing?ip=203.217.37.137"
[20:19] <toad_> http://dsbl.org/message?9610745
[20:20] <toad_> Message Received: 2003/09/06 05:42:17 UTC
[20:20] <toad_> woah
[20:20] <mazzanet> haha
[20:20] <toad_> that was a loooong time ago...
[20:20] <toad_> http://dsbl.org/removalquery :)
[20:21] <toad_> mazzanet: just use that link
[20:22] <mazzanet> bah
[20:22] <mazzanet> it sent the confirmation off to abus@iinet.net.au
[20:22] <mazzanet> oh well
[20:23] <toad_> who's that? your ISP?
[20:23] <mazzanet> yeah
[20:23] <toad_> okay, nothing I have seen today convinces me that queueing isn't the next logical step
[20:24] <toad_> so soon, I will make a start
[20:24] <toad_> but not today. bbl zzz.
[20:24] <mazzanet> night
[20:25] <toad_> s/today/now
[20:26] <toad_> tomorrow meaning after i have slept, perhaps
[20:29] <greycat> toad_: when you send mail to the lists, you're not putting in a "From:" header. This confuses mutt into thinking the mail is from me.
[20:39] <toad_> greycat: that's odd
[20:40] <toad_> To: Discussion of development issues <devl@freenetproject.org>
[20:40] <toad_> Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] routing suggestion
[20:40] <toad_> From: Toad <toad@amphibian.dyndns.org>
[20:40] <toad_> List-Id: Discussion of development issues <devl.freenetproject.org>
[20:40] <toad_> bb
[20:40] <toad_> l
[20:41] <greycat> well, the ones on chat@ don't have a From:
[20:41] <greycat> I'm only subscribed to chat@ at the moment
[20:45] * brunner (~chris@dsl-30-35.cofs.net) has joined #freenet
[20:45] <brunner> will there ever be a day when freenet runs half as quickly as the rest of the internet?
[20:48] <greycat> hold on, let me get my magic 8-ball
[20:50] <brunner> sweet
[20:50] <brunner> let me know.
[20:53] <brunner> is this a goal of freenet?
[20:54] <greycat> I don't think it's likely, nor do I think it's a goal per se.
[20:54] <greycat> but toad may have a different opinion, whenever he wakes up
[20:58] <toad_> one day, it will run a lot faster than it does now
[20:58] <toad_> it will run fast enough to be useful to a much wider audience
[20:58] <toad_> we hope
[20:59] <toad_> we may in fact have performance advantages over some other distribution mechanisms
[20:59] <greycat> I'm assuming that by the time that happens, the "internet" will be nearly inconceivably faster than it is now, so freenet will never get up to half the speed of the "internet"
[20:59] <toad_> greycat: that assumes freenet's performance as a function of the underlying medium never improves
[21:00] <greycat> it also depends on how we measure speed
[21:00] <toad_> but in any case, we can get good transfer rates now; latency and most importantly success rates are where it's at
[21:01] <toad_> bye
[21:06] * jokern (~virus@213.184.217.12) has joined #freenet
[21:11] * brunner (~chris@dsl-30-35.cofs.net) has left #freenet
[21:45] * spaetz (~spaetz@217-162-197-136.dclient.hispeed.ch) Quit ("Leaving")
[21:52] * MosMerv (~aolisevil@cm-adsl-12-178-135-145.southshore.com) Quit ()
[22:02] * Redb3ard (~oylerj@c-24-125-12-101.va.client2.attbi.com) has joined #freenet
[22:04] * Kyon (~Kyon@pcd396122.netvigator.com) Quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
[22:05] * Zv2S (~rfc1413@squirrel.owl.de) has joined #freenet
[22:09] <Redb3ard> so whats up guys?
[22:10] * xChaplin (~blah@CPE000c419e6b8d-CM014460007148.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) has joined #freenet
[22:10] <xChaplin> Why is my freenet port in my .ini file set to 34844. Shouldn't it be something like 10009 or 10010 ?
[22:11] <Redb3ard> i'd set it to 70123 myself
[22:11] <Redb3ard> ive always liked that port
[22:11] <greycat> 70123 is not a valid port number
[22:11] <Redb3ard> yes it is
[22:11] <greycat> 34844, 10009 and 10010 are all fine.
[22:11] <Redb3ard> im using IPv10
[22:12] <Redb3ard> port numbers are all 16bytes in size
[22:12] <xChaplin> Which port do nodes look for?
[22:12] <greycat> the one that your node announces to the universe
[22:12] <greycat> every node has a (potentially) different listenPort
[22:13] <xChaplin> I see, I still find it strange the default port has changed
[22:13] <greycat> there IS NO default. never was. it's random.
[22:13] <greycat> if you blew away your config and generated a new one, you re-rolled the dice.
[22:14] <xChaplin> Really? I never knew that. Incredible!
[22:15] <xChaplin> That explains so much. Thanks.
[22:23] * xChaplin (~blah@CPE000c419e6b8d-CM014460007148.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) Quit ()
[22:44] * xChaplin (~blah@CPE000c419e6b8d-CM014460007148.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) has joined #freenet
[22:46] <xChaplin> My node is in the starting state. How can I check if it's stuck because of bad settings on my part or if everything is fine but just taking a while. Should hte listening port show up in netstat?
[23:05] * xChaplin (~blah@CPE000c419e6b8d-CM014460007148.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) Quit ()
These logs were automatically created by Jay Oliveri with his gimp hapi on irc.freenode.net.
