--- Log opened Tue Nov 05 23:14:03 2002
23:14 < logger> test
23:55 < nop> hineo
23:55 < Neo> hinop
23:57 < nop> hi hezekiah
--- Day changed Wed Nov 06 2002
00:00 < Neo> 23:00:00.00 UTC
00:00 < nop> ok
00:00 < nop> welcome
00:00 < nop> I kind of want to wait, looks like a relay died
00:00 < nop> just another minute
00:00 < nop> so that people can re-assimilate ;)
00:01 < hezekiah> Yeah. I got bumped out about 30 seconds ago.
00:01 < nop> right
00:01 < nop> ok
00:01 < nop> ok
00:01 < nop> welcome to the n-th iip-dev meeting
00:02 < hezekiah> 18th!
00:02 < nop> I think it's like the 18th
00:02 < nop> yes
00:02 < nop> thnx
00:02 < nop> on the agenda
00:02 < nop> 1) welcome <-- we're doing this now
00:02 < nop> 2) agenda list <-- we're doing this now
00:02 < nop> 3) ;)
00:03 < nop> 4) IIP logo
00:03 < nop> 5) Dev report
00:03 < nop> 6) RC3 (coming soon, we promise)
00:03 < nop> 7) questions
00:03 < nop> .
00:03 < nop> ok we did the welcome and the agenda
00:03 < nop> let's do the ;)
00:03 < nop> ;)
00:04 < nop> Ok IIP logo
00:04 < nop> and slogan
00:04 < co> Where can we see the logos that have been submitted?
00:04 < nop> none have really been submitted
00:04 < nop> except one
00:04 < nop> and I submitted a slogan for InvisibleNet
00:04 < nop> I'll tell you mine
00:05 < nop> front part of shirt "You can't attack what you can't see..."
00:05 < nop> then back would say
00:05 < nop> InvisibleNet
00:05 < nop> then there's this other one, I'll mail to iip-dev
00:05 < nop> but no one else seems to care
00:05 < nop> so... :(
00:06 < nop> then again
00:06 < nop> no one seems to want to buy shirts for IIP anyway
00:06 < nop> so... what can ya do
00:06 < nop> yes we're working on getting black shirts
00:06 < nop> next on the agenda
00:06 < nop> Dev report
00:07 < nop> same ol' same ol' dev is working on the core control
00:08 < nop> userx will give a brief summary
00:08 < hezekiah> *applause*
00:09 < UserX> core control will provide a system for being able to support multiple cores in iip. each core is esssentially network protocol
00:10 < UserX> .
00:10 < nop> ok
00:10 < nop> thank you UserX
00:10 < nop> man of many words
00:10 < nop> ;)
00:10 < nop> or woman
00:10 < nop> never know
00:10 < nop> anyway
00:10 < nop> RC3
00:11 < nop> it's on it's way out the door, I believe there is an openbsd compatibility that was reported and from what I know, it's been patched and cvs'd
00:11 < nop> (for some reason, I haven't got a listserv about it)
00:11 < nop> but we're hoping that this weekend would be a good time to do an RC3 upgrade
00:11 < nop> and it's not going to conflict with rc2 in any way
00:12 < nop> just mostly bug fixes
00:12 < nop> Questions
00:12 < nop> anyone?
00:12 < codeshark> so everything is in cvs now?
00:12 < dj28> yea
00:12 < dj28> i have a stupid one
00:12 < dj28> when will the IIP core server migrate away from the irc protocol?
00:12 < nop> codeshark - I believe so, please check with UserX to make sure he's comfortable with it
00:13 < nop> this is what the core control dev work puts us in a position to do
00:13 < dj28> and when will it become completely distributed?
00:13 < dj28> oh ok
00:13 < nop> so then we'll be able to build upon that
00:13 < UserX> codeshark: it will be once my server is talking to the internet again
00:13 < nop> and we hope to have 1.2 a fully distributed version
00:13 < dj28> ok. cool
00:13 < nop> at least at communication level
00:13 < nop> the routing might still be run through inform
00:14 < nop> but the communication should be decentralized
00:14 < nop> similar to how freenet 0.3 was
00:14 < dj28> yea
00:14 < nop> any other questions?
00:15 < co> So a core is a package of encryption algorithms that allow network communication?
00:15 < co> Explain that concept again, please.
00:15 < Mak> wow ...i jumped here ...sorry ...
00:16 < nop> well
00:16 < nop> a core is a network protocol
00:16 < nop> this puts us in a modular position
00:16 < nop> to possibly support many routing architectures
00:16 < Neo> oooh nice...
00:17 < nop> this could position us to support many protocols
00:18 < nop> the core control is similar to an API for cores
00:19 < nop> any more questions?
00:19 < co> Thank you.
00:19 < nop> np
00:21 < nop> oh
00:21 < nop> one more thing
00:22 < nop> Many thanks to Phiberoptika for her fine translation of the El Pais newspaper article done on IIP
00:22 < nop> it appears in spanish and with english translation (done by Phiberoptika) on the iip site www.invisiblenet.net/iip
00:22 < nop> it's a good article
00:22 < hezekiah> Cool! I'll have to check that out! Thanks, Phiberoptika! :)
00:22 < al-jabr> I have a question...
00:22 < nop> yes sir
00:22 < al-jabr> Two questions
00:22 < nop> sure
00:22 < al-jabr> I had one problem
00:23 < al-jabr> running IIP in linux, don't know if it's actually an IIP problem
00:23 < al-jabr> after I killed isproxy
00:23 < al-jabr> and tried to run again, it couldn't bind to the port
00:23 < al-jabr> had this problem a couple times, had to change the port number
00:23 < al-jabr> but when i logged of and on again (a few days later) the port was available
00:24 < al-jabr> so I'm not sure that's directly an issue with isproxy
00:24 < hezekiah> Is this reproducable, or just a random happening?
00:24 < nop> right, if you wait like 1 minute with RC2 you can rebind
00:24 < UserX> was something connected to it when you killed it?
00:24 < al-jabr> i'll try to reproduce it
00:24 < al-jabr> but
00:24 < al-jabr> no, nothing was connected to 6667
00:25 < nop> oh that port
00:25 < nop> hmm
00:25 < al-jabr> and it happened like three or four times and i had to keep changing ports
00:25 < al-jabr> yeah
00:25 < al-jabr> not the other one
00:25 < Phiberoptika> re:article: ;)!!!, no problem chicos..
00:25 < al-jabr> i haven't reproduced it since then, but i haven't been trying
00:25 < nop> hehe
00:25 < al-jabr> since i rarely go restarted isproxy
00:26 < al-jabr> i should probably try to. also, i was experiencing a lot of problems with the network for the last few days
00:26 < Povert> I have a question....
00:26 < al-jabr> and i don't know if it's something local
00:26 < UserX> odd. the only reason i know for that to happen is that if the connection is closed properly it will be left hanging and you have to wait for the OS to time it out
00:26 < Povert> is de openbsd thing realy solved?
00:26 < al-jabr> or if it's not really any worse than it's usually been
00:27 < al-jabr> because, before the last couple days, i got kicked off, maybe a couple times a day at MOST, then all of the sudden i was getting kicked off every few minutes, and sometimes not getting on at all, and sometimes lagging
00:27 < UserX> al-jabr: did you try using netstat to see if there were any lingering connections to port 6667
00:27 < al-jabr> and changing node.refs didn't seem to help
00:27 < al-jabr> no, i should have investigated that
00:27 < al-jabr> silly me
00:27 < al-jabr> i'll try it a bit more and i'll do that
00:28 < al-jabr> i didn't think that there could be connections on the other end after the server is killed
00:28 < nop> would netstat give a TIME_WAIT?
00:29 < hezekiah> Also, sometimes a process of isproxy hangs (but that only has happened to me when I'm debugging buggy code.) You should be able to check to see if there are still a hanging process of isproxy by doing: ps -e | grep isproxy
00:29 < al-jabr> i did that
00:29 < al-jabr> no isproxies were running
00:29 < hezekiah> Good. :)
00:30 < al-jabr> no, bad.
00:30 < al-jabr> but anyway, i'll investigate that some more, probably not a big issue
00:32 < Povert> nop
00:32 < Povert> is openbsd kompilation ready solved?
00:32 < Neo> diff -r1.2 sock.h
00:32 < Neo> 45c45
00:32 < Neo> < #elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__MACH__)
00:32 < Neo> ---
00:32 < Neo> > #elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__MACH__) || defined(__OpenBSD__)
00:33 < Povert> in codetree I meen
00:34 < nop> it's about to be committed
00:34 < Povert> ok
00:34 < Povert> dank
00:34 < nop> yep
00:37 < nop> any more questions?
00:42 < nop> thanks for attending
00:42 < nop> .