i2p.www/www.i2p2/pages/meeting148.html

{% extends "_layout.html" %}
{% block title %}I2P Development Meeting 148{% endblock %}
{% block content %}<h3>I2P dev meeting, September 20 @ 20:00 GMT</h3>
<div class="irclog">
<p>16:18 &lt; jrandom&gt; 0) hi</p>
<p>16:18 &lt; jrandom&gt; 1) 0.6.0.6</p>
<p>16:18 &lt; jrandom&gt; 2) I2Phex 0.1.1.27</p>
<p>16:18 &lt; jrandom&gt; 3) migration</p>
<p>16:18 &lt; jrandom&gt; 4) ???</p>
<p>16:18 &lt; jrandom&gt; 0) hi</p>
<p>16:18  * jrandom waves</p>
<p>16:18 &lt; jrandom&gt; weekly status notes posted up @ http://dev.i2p.net/pipermail/i2p/2005-September/000929.html</p>
<p>16:18 &lt;+postman&gt; hello</p>
<p>16:18 &lt; forest&gt; hi</p>
<p>16:18 &lt; jrandom&gt; lets jump on in to 1) 0.6.0.6</p>
<p>16:19 &lt; jrandom&gt; the status notes cover pretty much what i've got on my mind for 0.6.0.6.  anyone have any questions/concerns/comments to bring up?</p>
<p>16:19 &lt;+postman&gt; jrandom: observation:</p>
<p>16:19 &lt;+postman&gt; jrandom: much higher bandwidth consumption</p>
<p>16:20 &lt;+postman&gt; jrandom: all within the limits and running fine - but my routers really getting warm now</p>
<p>16:20  * nickless_head makes similar observation</p>
<p>16:20 &lt; jrandom&gt; aye, me too, i think its likely due to an increase in bt and i2phex traffic</p>
<p>16:20 &lt;+postman&gt; what increase, with just 80 active torrents on the tracker? :)</p>
<p>16:20 &lt; jrandom&gt; heh</p>
<p>16:21 &lt;+postman&gt; but its good to see, that the network does not crumble</p>
<p>16:21 &lt;+postman&gt; irc is pretty stable altho the router does 50k/s atm</p>
<p>16:21 &lt; jrandom&gt; mos' def'.  i'm not even logged into freenode anymore, as irc here is stable enough</p>
<p>16:22  * postman hands the mike back</p>
<p>16:22 &lt; jrandom&gt; cool, thanks.  i think there's definitely still room to go for bandwidth efficiency, but it seems reasonable atm</p>
<p>16:22 &lt; jrandom&gt; (hopefully the thing i'm working on will help, but more on that when its ready)</p>
<p>16:22 &lt; fox&gt; &lt;mihi&gt; you should definitely distinguish between OK (Nat) and Err (Nat)...</p>
<p>16:23 &lt; fox&gt; &lt;mihi&gt; or is your hole punching almighty?</p>
<p>16:23 &lt; jrandom&gt; heh</p>
<p>16:23 &lt; jrandom&gt; well, ERR-SymmetricNAT is and will continue to be an ERR</p>
<p>16:23 &lt; fox&gt; &lt;mihi&gt; or is it impossible to check whether it was successful?</p>
<p>16:24 &lt; fox&gt; &lt;mihi&gt; ok</p>
<p>16:24 &lt; jrandom&gt; but ERR-Reject is due to restricted cone, while full cone nats work fine</p>
<p>16:24 &lt; jrandom&gt; (since i2p uses only one source port for everyone, as long as you're on i2p you'll have a hole punched for the full cone)</p>
<p>16:25 &lt; jrandom&gt; still, it is better when people forward their ports so they don't need introducers, as that lets them also become introducers themselves</p>
<p>16:25 &lt; fox&gt; &lt;mihi&gt; as long as there are no nasty iptables rules (like drop UDP to 8887 from IP addresses divisable by 7 :) )</p>
<p>16:25 &lt; jrandom&gt; heh</p>
<p>16:26 &lt; jrandom&gt; and unfortunately, some people do have b0rked configurations like that (*cough*peerguardian*cough*)</p>
<p>16:26 &lt; jrandom&gt; someone the other day was wondering why i2p didn't work, even though they had their firewall dropping packets from all .edu peers</p>
<p>16:27 &lt;+Ragnarok&gt; .edu?  That's pretty random</p>
<p>16:27 &lt; jrandom&gt; yeah, made no sense to me, in so many ways</p>
<p>16:27 &lt; jrandom&gt; but, c'est la vie</p>
<p>16:27  * nickless_head sings: We don't need no education...</p>
<p>16:28 &lt; jrandom&gt; heh</p>
<p>16:28 &lt; jrandom&gt; ok, anyone else have anything on 1) 0.6.0.6?</p>
<p>16:29 &lt; jrandom&gt; if not, moving on to 2) i2phex 0.1.1.27</p>
<p>16:29 &lt; jrandom&gt; not much to say here beyond whats in the mail either...</p>
<p>16:30 &lt;+postman&gt; jrandom: there was no positive response in the mentioned forums either :(</p>
<p>16:31 &lt;+postman&gt; jrandom: i will forward your statusnotes and links - maybe the readers get the point</p>
<p>16:31 &lt; jrandom&gt; postman: people are of course able to use whatever they want, but I don't recommend the binary release from legion as the source doesn't match the binary, and the launcher is entirely closed source</p>
<p>16:32 &lt; jrandom&gt; now that we've got i2phex on a web accessible location, built from cvs, hopefully that will reduce people's reliance on that</p>
<p>16:33 &lt; jrandom&gt; (perhaps if you want to post the irc log from #i2p-chat an hour or two ago between legion and i, that might help explain the situation to people more completely)</p>
<p>16:34 &lt; jrandom&gt; ok, anyone else have anyhing on 2) i2phex, or shall we move on to 3) migration</p>
<p>16:34  * postman has a look</p>
<p>16:34 &lt; jrandom&gt; there's not much really to add for 3), its more of an fyi</p>
<p>16:34 &lt; jrandom&gt; so, perhaps we can jump quickly to 4) ???</p>
<p>16:34 &lt; jrandom&gt; anyone have anything else they want to bring up for the meeting?</p>
<p>16:35 &lt;+Complication&gt; Migration?</p>
<p>16:36 &lt; jrandom&gt; if you didn't notice, great :)</p>
<p>16:36 &lt; jrandom&gt; we moved from one colo to another</p>
<p>16:36 &lt; jrandom&gt; (cvs.i2p.net, dev.i2p.net, www.i2p.net, mail.i2p.net)</p>
<p>16:36 &lt;+Complication&gt; Oh, that migration. :)</p>
<p>16:36  * Complication is simply a bit slow today</p>
<p>16:39 &lt;+Complication&gt; By the way, 0.6.0.6 seems very nice... in the regard that my router didn't touch 0 participating tunnels in 54 hours.</p>
<p>16:39 &lt;+Complication&gt; Not even once.</p>
<p>16:39 &lt; jrandom&gt; nice</p>
<p>16:40 &lt; jrandom&gt; ok, if there's nothing else people want to bring up for the meeting...</p>
<p>16:40  * jrandom winds up</p>
<p>16:40 &lt;+postman&gt; jrandom: one thing</p>
<p>16:40  * jrandom stops winding</p>
<p>16:40 &lt;+postman&gt; jrandom: you just incremented the i2phex version - what if sirup plans another release?</p>
<p>16:40 &lt; jrandom&gt; postman: sirup uses the cvs</p>
<p>16:41 &lt;+postman&gt; jrandom: how about giving it a an additional tag</p>
<p>16:41 &lt;+postman&gt; ok, that's fine then</p>
<p>16:41 &lt;+postman&gt; :)</p>
<p>16:41  * postman is back in his cave</p>
<p>16:41 &lt; jrandom&gt; (developing code outside a source control system == crazy)</p>
<p>16:41  * Kefoo remembers how crazy it was developing inside a source control system, too</p>
<p>16:41 &lt;+postman&gt; jrandom: (it did not need to be YOUR's)</p>
<p>16:42 &lt; jrandom&gt; heh true enough Kefoo ;)</p>
<p>16:42 &lt; jrandom&gt; heh well, yeah... his just happens to be though ;)</p>
<p>16:43  * bar just set a new personal record of 156 concurrent udp connections (old record was 152)</p>
<p>16:43 &lt; jrandom&gt; cool, yeah, i saw 173 earlier today</p>
<p>16:44 &lt;+bar&gt; oh :) yeah the indtroducing is doing its thing fo' sure</p>
<p>16:44 &lt; Kefoo&gt; Not to backtrack, but is i2phex supossed to try connecting on startup? I've heard both yes and no.</p>
<p>16:44 &lt;+bar&gt; -d</p>
<p>16:44 &lt; jrandom&gt; wikked bar</p>
<p>16:44 &lt; jrandom&gt; Kefoo: afaik, no.</p>
<p>16:44 &lt; jrandom&gt; but, i'm no phex dev</p>
<p>16:45 &lt; Kefoo&gt; The only way I've found is to copy and paste the host keys into the program and connect to them manually</p>
<p>16:45 &lt; jrandom&gt; thats what i've done Kefoo</p>
<p>16:45 &lt;+postman&gt; wind ye up now, jrandom :)</p>
<p>16:45 &lt; Kefoo&gt; Ok, so I'm not making it harder than it should be</p>
<p>16:45 &lt; Kefoo&gt; I do that sometimes</p>
<p>16:46 &lt; jrandom&gt; Kefoo: if there's something easier, i'd like to hear about it :)</p>
<p>16:46 &lt; jrandom&gt; ok ok postman, you can go get your beer ;)</p>
<p>16:46  * jrandom winds up</p>
<p>16:46  * jrandom *baf*s the meeting closed</p>
</div>
{% endblock %}