{% extends "_layout.html" %} {% block title %}I2P Development Meeting 190{% endblock %} {% block content %}

I2P dev meeting, November 21, 2006

15:02 < jrandom> 0) hi

15:02 < jrandom> 1) Net status

15:02 < jrandom> 2) Syndie dev status

15:02 < jrandom> 3) ???

15:02 < jrandom> 0) hi

15:02 * jrandom waves

15:02 < jrandom> weekly status notes posted up at http://dev.i2p.net/pipermail/i2p/2006-November/001319.html

15:03 < jrandom> since that one is pretty short, lets jump on in to 1) net status

15:04 < jrandom> things are looking pretty good atm, network seems pretty steady

15:04 <+zzz> I invented a "peer capacity index"

15:04 <+zzz> on the dashboard...

15:04 <+zzz> so far not sure it is helpful though

15:04 < jrandom> ah yeah, sorry, metioned that one last week - looks quite useful, thanks!

15:05 < jrandom> interesting to see the disparity out there so clarly

15:05 <+zzz> the idea is the ratio of high-cap routers to low-cap routers, which is obviously important to tunnel build %

15:06 <+zzz> I'm removing routers from stats that I don't get a netdb update for in 1.5 hours but that seems too quick, I think it is skewing the stats

15:07 < jrandom> ah, ok, that would explain it. are you still harvesting?

15:07 < jrandom> (or wget'ing from dev.i2p.net?)

15:08 <+zzz> yes

15:08 < jrandom> cool

15:08 <+zzz> netDb.harvestDirectly=false

15:08 <+zzz> netDb.shouldHarvest=true, right?

15:09 < jrandom> so the stats we've had before were largely based on routers that were so bad the user shut them down & disapeared then?

15:09 < jrandom> right

15:10 <+zzz> it's always been 1.5 hours, but plotting the M/N/O routers, they seem to come and go when intuitively they should stay pretty constant

15:10 < jrandom> ah ok

15:10 <+zzz> you can see spikes/dips in all the data that last 1.5 hours :)

15:11 < spaetz> net seems pretty stable. Yep

15:12 <+zzz> thats all I have for that topic

15:12 < spaetz> I'd like to know if jrandom completely focuses on syndie nowadays or if he still looks at i2p dev.

15:12 < spaetz> or if this is just a bit on hte backburner temporarily

15:13 * jrandom completely focuses on syndie nowadays, but will work on i2p both when there are problems and once syndie is established

15:13 * spaetz thanks for the information

15:14 * spaetz is fine with this

15:15 < jrandom> w3wt. yeah, steadystate means syndie dev can continue, but if there are problems, of course i reprioritize

15:15 < jrandom> ok, anyone have anything else on 1) net status?

15:15 < Walter> I have a random question.

15:15 < jrandom> hit me Walter

15:17 < Walter> Assume you have 100Mb/s BW, what kind of server would you need to saturate it as an I2P node?

15:17 < jrandom> doesnt matter

15:17 < jrandom> i2p does not and will not saturate 100Mbps

15:18 < Walter> Assume one wanted to make use of available BW.

15:18 < jrandom> you would not.

15:19 < spaetz> I've got 150kbs up and down and it uses like 25% of a vserver (Dell shared with a dozen others)

15:19 < jrandom> that exceeds the capacity of the entire network

15:19 < spaetz> 25%CPU that is

15:19 * spaetz admits that's not really a precise answer and shuts up

15:20 < jrandom> the routers themselves have a mem v. throughput tradeoff, making it less likely that a router can even push > 3-350KBps

15:20 < jrandom> (of course, that tradeoff can be tweake to allow higher rates, but thats not an issue)

15:21 < jrandom> using bandwidth is *BAD* unless that bandwidth is being used only when necessary

15:22 <+zzz> the network is averaging about 1.5 MBps (=12 Mbps) total traffic over the last 3 months

15:23 < Walter> I see.

15:24 <+fox> <LeerokKitchen> Field trip!

15:26 < jrandom> ok, if there's nothing else for 1) net status, lets jump on over to 2) syndie dev status

15:26 < jrandom> progress here continues, and i've been doing testing both on windows and linux

15:28 < jrandom> current battle is on the forum management interface, though since the text interface is already embedded, all functionality is already in place

15:29 < jrandom> not much more news to discuss on that front though

15:30 < jrandom> anyone have any questions/comments/concerns on 2) syndie dev status?

15:33 < jrandom> ok, lets jump on to 3) ???

15:33 < jrandom> y'all have anything else for the meeting?

15:34 <+fox> <blx> when will gpl java be usable with i2p=

15:34 <+fox> <blx> ?

15:35 < Complication3> I guess it depends on when gpl java will be usable on various distros

15:35 < Complication3> Or available for download from Sun

15:36 < Complication3> But it feels like a moot point, since it's the same Java which is usable already now

15:36 < Complication3> GPL would only let it be packaged more conveniently, and improved upon

15:37 < jrandom> (and i2p already works with gcj/kaffe, though not all of the client apps)

15:37 * Complication3 quickly reads backlog

15:37 < jrandom> ((and syndie works with gcj/kaffe completely))

15:38 <+fox> <blx> Compilation, thats what they want you to think ;)

15:38 <+fox> <blx> but ok, i got my question answered.

15:38 <+fox> <blx> Complication even. misread

15:39 < Complication3> blx: well, the sources are available already now, it's just that few read and compile them

15:39 < jrandom> (and you can even modify and use those modifications, you just can't distribute your mods)

15:40 < koff> when will i2p have the logging functionality suggested by the proposed laws i heard about?

15:41 < jrandom> never

15:41 <+zzz> hahahaha

15:41 * Complication3 suspects never :)

15:41 <+fox> <blx> what laws?

15:41 * jrandom assumes you refer to .de/.eu data retention issues

15:41 < Complication3> Someone in the forum talked of a (proposed) law in Germany

15:42 < jrandom> (and then the .us ones in a few years)

15:42 < Complication3> They could have spelled it out better though

15:42 < jrandom> aye, 'tis just proposed, but not a big suprise

15:43 < Complication3> I personally think: it's not like data retention laws aren't being broken left and right already

15:43 < Complication3> Breaking a dozen more of them? I personally wouldn't care much...

15:44 < Complication3> In short, I want to see how they're going to enforce it

15:44 < tea> like they did with napster : arrest everyone

15:45 < Complication3> If they manage to make a good try, something will need to be found to thwart that ("not in my country" peering principle for countries where insanity prevails)

15:45 <+fox> <LeerokLacerta> That reminds me of a song.

15:45 <+fox> <LeerokLacerta> http://2ch.ru/mu/src/1163070550597.mp3

15:46 < tea> turning all data traffic over to anonymous networks might help ...

15:47 < Complication3> Just ignoring them en masse has worked for plain ordinary pirates...

15:47 < Complication3> You can arrest one person ignoring you. Can't do that with several hundred thousand.

15:47 < tea> that's no argument for a german :)

15:47 <+fox> <modulus> you can

15:47 <+fox> <modulus> hitler did

15:48 < Complication3> That's only because nobody bothered removing him

15:48 < jrandom> *cough*

15:48 < Complication3> Had they taken up arms, it wouldn't have worked

15:48 < Complication3> (sorry, far off topic, yes)

15:48 < tea> still, one does feel important in being paranoid

15:48 <+fox> <modulus> that said i think i2p could comply with data retention laws without damaging anonimity, but there's no reason to do that.

15:48 < jrandom> ok, well, i think we've addressed the i2p-related issue there ;)

15:48 < tea> sry

15:49 < jrandom> aye modulus

15:49 < jrandom> (we already assume individual users are logging everything anyway, as are the isps)

15:49 <+fox> <modulus> right, so a DR-enabled i2p wouldn't be the end of the world

15:51 < Complication3> Someone would have to bother forking that, though... :P

15:52 * jrandom keeps my mouth shut ;)

15:52 < jrandom> ok, anyone have anything else for the meeting?

15:53 < jrandom> if not

15:53 * jrandom winds up

15:53 * jrandom *baf*s the meeting closed

{% endblock %}