forked from I2P_Developers/i2p.www
178 lines
14 KiB
HTML
178 lines
14 KiB
HTML
{% extends "_layout.html" %}
|
|
{% block title %}Pages/meeting126.html{% endblock %}
|
|
{% block content %}<h3>I2P dev meeting, January 25, 2005</h3>
|
|
<div class="irclog">
|
|
<p>13:50 < jrandom> 0) hi</p>
|
|
<p>13:50 < jrandom> 1) 0.5 status</p>
|
|
<p>13:50 < jrandom> 2) sam.net</p>
|
|
<p>13:50 < jrandom> 3) gcj progress</p>
|
|
<p>13:50 < jrandom> 4) udp</p>
|
|
<p>13:50 < jrandom> 5) ???</p>
|
|
<p>13:50 < jrandom> 0) hi</p>
|
|
<p>13:50 * jrandom waves belatedly</p>
|
|
<p>13:51 < jrandom> weekly status notes posted up to http://dev.i2p.net/pipermail/i2p/2005-January/000560.html</p>
|
|
<p>13:51 <+postman> hi</p>
|
|
<p>13:51 * brachtus waves back</p>
|
|
<p>13:52 * cervantes waves a detention slip for tardiness</p>
|
|
<p>13:52 < jrandom> yeah yeah, blame the code for sucking me in</p>
|
|
<p>13:52 < jrandom> ok, jumping into 1) 0.5 status</p>
|
|
<p>13:53 < jrandom> lots of progress since last week - all the messy problems we had with the new crypto are resolved without much trouble</p>
|
|
<p>13:54 < jrandom> the latest http://dev.i2p.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/i2p/router/doc/tunnel-alt.html?rev=HEAD is very likely to be what we deploy in 0.5 and beyond, unless/until people find any problems with it</p>
|
|
<p>13:55 < jrandom> not sure if i have anything else to add beyond whats in the email</p>
|
|
<p>13:55 < jrandom> anyone have any questions/concerns?</p>
|
|
<p>13:56 < Ragnarok> what's performance going to be like?</p>
|
|
<p>13:56 < jrandom2p> (not me)</p>
|
|
<p>13:56 < jrandom> Ragnarok: tunnel performance should be much better</p>
|
|
<p>13:56 < frosk> any significant overhead compared to what we have today?</p>
|
|
<p>13:57 < jrandom> frosk: sometimes</p>
|
|
<p>13:57 < jrandom> frosk: when we can coallesce messages in a tunnel, the overhead will be minimal</p>
|
|
<p>13:58 < jrandom> however, when we cannot coallesce or when its not effective, there can be nontrivial waste</p>
|
|
<p>13:58 < frosk> i see</p>
|
|
<p>13:59 < jrandom> otoh, we're trimming some of the absurdities of our current i2np (where we currently prepend a 32 byte SHA256 before each I2NP message, even ones within garlic messages, etc)</p>
|
|
<p>13:59 < jrandom> the fragmentation and fixed size will be an issue we need to tune with, but there is lots of room to do so</p>
|
|
<p>14:01 < jrandom> ok, anytihng else on 0.5?</p>
|
|
<p>14:02 < jrandom> if not, moving on to 2) sam.net</p>
|
|
<p>14:02 < jrandom> smeghead has ported the java sam client lib to .net (yay!)</p>
|
|
<p>14:02 < jrandom> smeghead: wanna give us the rundown?</p>
|
|
<p>14:03 < smeghead> sure</p>
|
|
<p>14:03 < smeghead> i'm writing tests for it, should have those in cvs in the next couple of days</p>
|
|
<p>14:04 < smeghead> should work with .net/mono/portable.net</p>
|
|
<p>14:04 < smeghead> and c# and vb.net</p>
|
|
<p>14:05 < frosk> (and all of the other languages that works with .net i suppose)</p>
|
|
<p>14:05 < cervantes> (urgh)</p>
|
|
<p>14:05 < smeghead> the interface is dirt simple</p>
|
|
<p>14:05 < smeghead> just register listener methods with SamReader, or subclass SamBaseEventHandler and override methods as necessary</p>
|
|
<p>14:05 < smeghead> yes, i aim to make it fully CLR compatible</p>
|
|
<p>14:06 < jrandom> wikked</p>
|
|
<p>14:06 < cervantes> cool... smeg.net ;-)</p>
|
|
<p>14:06 < frosk> goodie</p>
|
|
<p>14:06 < smeghead> really not much else to it</p>
|
|
<p>14:06 <+protokol> CLR?</p>
|
|
<p>14:06 < smeghead> common language runtime</p>
|
|
<p>14:06 < smeghead> the .net equivalent of the JRE</p>
|
|
<p>14:07 <+protokol> JRE?</p>
|
|
<p>14:07 <+protokol> just kidding</p>
|
|
<p>14:07 < jrandom> !thwap protokol </p>
|
|
<p>14:07 < Ragnarok> jrandom: how's the sam bridge holding up these days? were all the bt related issues resolved?</p>
|
|
<p>14:08 < Tracker> I doubt it, i2p-bt can even drive my amd64 3000 mad, cpu-wise...</p>
|
|
<p>14:08 < jrandom> Ragnarok: i havent touched it lately. there's still the outstanding choke issue that polecat came up with, but where the i2p-bt<-->sam bridge is getting off, i'm not sure</p>
|
|
<p>14:09 < jrandom> hmm, failed connections will force full ElGamal instead of AES</p>
|
|
<p>14:10 < Ragnarok> ok</p>
|
|
<p>14:10 < jrandom> we should be able to reduce some of that after 0.5, but only partially</p>
|
|
<p>14:12 < Tracker> Ok, the I2P will be good for anonymus trackers but not for anonymus clients. Just try to think what happens on a really popular torrent with some 1000 seeds and leechs.</p>
|
|
<p>14:12 < jrandom> ok, the sam.net stuff sounds cool, thanks again smeghead. i'm looking forward to the unit tests and perhaps a demo app :)</p>
|
|
<p>14:12 < ant> <Evil-Brotten> hello everbody</p>
|
|
<p>14:12 < smeghead> a demo app, yes i'll do that too</p>
|
|
<p>14:13 < smeghead> i've ported yours in fact</p>
|
|
<p>14:13 < jrandom> Tracker: i2p can handle anonymous clients just fine, we just need to figure out whats wrong with the i2p-bt<-->sam bridge to reduce the full ElG's</p>
|
|
<p>14:13 < smeghead> they're just bug-ridden atm</p>
|
|
<p>14:13 < ant> <Evil-Brotten> deer?</p>
|
|
<p>14:13 < jrandom> hi Evil-Brotten</p>
|
|
<p>14:13 < ant> <Evil-Brotten> hello</p>
|
|
<p>14:14 < jrandom> weekly dev meeting going on, feel free to stick around. deer is a gateway to i2p/iip</p>
|
|
<p>14:14 < ant> <Evil-Brotten> are you an i2p expert?</p>
|
|
<p>14:14 < ant> <Evil-Brotten> :P</p>
|
|
<p>14:14 < ant> <Evil-Brotten> ow, ok</p>
|
|
<p>14:14 < ant> <cervantes> Evil-Brotten: you can talk in #i2p-chat if you like while the meeting is ongoing</p>
|
|
<p>14:14 < jrandom> Tracker: we've got a lot to do before handling 1k-wide torrents</p>
|
|
<p>14:14 < ant> <Evil-Brotten> i was just trying to install your program, but i am having some problems</p>
|
|
<p>14:14 < ant> <Evil-Brotten> cool, i will ask there</p>
|
|
<p>14:15 < jrandom> wikked smeghead </p>
|
|
<p>14:15 < Tracker> jrandom: I hope so, non-anonymus bt won't survive much longer...</p>
|
|
<p>14:15 < frosk> nonsense</p>
|
|
<p>14:15 < jrandom> "but exeem is anonymous!@#" </snark></p>
|
|
<p>14:15 < Tracker> jrandom: But that's a different story</p>
|
|
<p>14:15 < ant> <MikeW> what?</p>
|
|
<p>14:15 < ant> <MikeW> who said exeem is anonymous?</p>
|
|
<p>14:16 < jrandom> mikew: just the occational fanboy</p>
|
|
<p>14:16 < jrandom> Tracker: after 0.5 we're going to have a lot of work to do getting performance where we need it to be</p>
|
|
<p>14:16 * DrWoo notes that 'people' are fucking morons (sometimes)</p>
|
|
<p>14:16 < Tracker> jrandom: Yeah, installing spy-/adware isn't really what I would do ;)</p>
|
|
<p>14:16 < jrandom> heh</p>
|
|
<p>14:17 < smeghead> i happen to like people</p>
|
|
<p>14:17 < smeghead> they're good on toast</p>
|
|
<p>14:17 < jrandom> *chomp*</p>
|
|
<p>14:17 < smeghead> some need a little more butter than others</p>
|
|
<p>14:18 < jrandom> ok, i think thats 'bout it for 2) sam.net (unless anyone has something else to add?)</p>
|
|
<p>14:18 < jrandom> if not, moving on to 3) gcj progress</p>
|
|
<p>14:19 < ant> <dm> sam.net??</p>
|
|
<p>14:19 < ant> <dm> is it working?/</p>
|
|
<p>14:19 < jrandom> i've read in my backlog that smeghead has been making some good headway - wanna give us an update on how its going?</p>
|
|
<p>14:19 < smeghead> yes</p>
|
|
<p>14:20 < ant> <dm> cooooooool</p>
|
|
<p>14:20 < smeghead> i modified a few classes so the router compiles with gcj 3.4.3</p>
|
|
<p>14:20 < smeghead> i will submit the patch after the meeting</p>
|
|
<p>14:20 < smeghead> after that i and anyone who would like to help can get to work on making it run</p>
|
|
<p>14:21 < jrandom> nice</p>
|
|
<p>14:21 * frosk decorates smeghead with the Employee of the Week medal for sam.net _and_ gcj work</p>
|
|
<p>14:21 < jrandom> aye, v.cool</p>
|
|
<p>14:21 < smeghead> :)</p>
|
|
<p>14:22 < Tracker> frosk: better forum user of the week ;)</p>
|
|
<p>14:22 < frosk> i haven't read the forum this week, sorry :)</p>
|
|
<p>14:22 < cervantes> duck's glory has not yet expired ;-)</p>
|
|
<p>14:23 * jrandom is very much looking forward to seeing i2p gcj compatible</p>
|
|
<p>14:24 < jrandom> (and there's still that bounty on it, so people should get in touch with smeghead and get involved ;)</p>
|
|
<p>14:24 < smeghead> yes it would expand i2p's portability significantly</p>
|
|
<p>14:24 < cervantes> maybe we'll be able to squeeze something that resembles performance from the router :P</p>
|
|
<p>14:24 < ant> <dm> my 32-week run as hardest I2P worker ends at last...</p>
|
|
<p>14:25 < jrandom> i dont expect gcj to actually improve performance or reduce the memory footprint, but it'll work on OSes that sun doesn't release JVMs for and kaffe is b0rked on</p>
|
|
<p>14:25 < jrandom> (but if i'm wrong, cool!)</p>
|
|
<p>14:25 < frosk> anything that can make i2p run better without proprietary software is Good</p>
|
|
<p>14:26 < jrandom> agreed. supporting both kaffe and gcj would be a Good Thing</p>
|
|
<p>14:27 < jrandom> ok, anything else on 3) gcj progress, or shall we move on?</p>
|
|
<p>14:27 < smeghead> installation would be easier too</p>
|
|
<p>14:27 < Teal`c> has gcj worked for anything besides 'hello world' examples ?</p>
|
|
<p>14:27 < Ragnarok> someone built eclipse with it</p>
|
|
<p>14:27 < smeghead> Teal`c: yes, i've used it for .exe's under mingw before in fact</p>
|
|
<p>14:27 < smeghead> yes, eclipse was running under gcj with red hat not to long ago</p>
|
|
<p>14:28 < jrandom> having the option of distributing gcj'ed executables, plain .jar installers, and bundled .jar+jvm will definitely be Good</p>
|
|
<p>14:29 < jrandom> ok, moving on to 4) udp</p>
|
|
<p>14:30 < jrandom> there was a recent post to the forum that i just wanted to draw people's attention to, asking (and answering) why udp is important</p>
|
|
<p>14:30 < Tracker> Yuck</p>
|
|
<p>14:30 < jrandom> (see http://forum.i2p.net/viewtopic.php?t=280 and comment if you have any suggestions/questions/concenrs)</p>
|
|
<p>14:31 < jrandom> yuck Tracker?</p>
|
|
<p>14:32 < jrandom> anyway, both mule and detonate are making some headway on the udp side. detonate/mule: y'all have any updates to share?</p>
|
|
<p>14:32 < Tracker> UPD is evil here, while it works well within the country borders it really get's ugly when trying to use it on destinations outside our countrys.</p>
|
|
<p>14:32 < jrandom> hmm</p>
|
|
<p>14:32 < Tracker> Just my experience from 5 years online gaming...</p>
|
|
<p>14:33 < jrandom> we'll certainly need to take into account the congestion and mtu issues as they go out on the net</p>
|
|
<p>14:33 < Tracker> Somehow the two big backbones here don't like to router UPD very well and if only with very low priority.</p>
|
|
<p>14:34 < Tracker> Meaning pings between 5 and 20 seconds.</p>
|
|
<p>14:34 < jrandom> i'd be pretty suprised if there was an isp that didn't allow UDP at all (since we all use DNS)</p>
|
|
<p>14:34 < Tracker> And high packet loss</p>
|
|
<p>14:34 < jrandom> congestion control is certainly important</p>
|
|
<p>14:35 < Tracker> Why do you think I'm running my own caching dns with a very big cache for years ;)</p>
|
|
<p>14:35 < jrandom> heh</p>
|
|
<p>14:35 < jrandom> well, we will have the fallback of tcp for people who cannot use udp for some reason</p>
|
|
<p>14:36 < jrandom> but udp will be overwhelmingly preferred </p>
|
|
<p>14:36 < Tracker> That's nice.</p>
|
|
<p>14:36 < jrandom> (meaning i hope there will only be perhaps 10 people using tcp out of 1m+ nodes ;)</p>
|
|
<p>14:37 < jrandom> but, again, that forum link explains why we need to do what we're doing, though if anyone can find a better way, i'm all ears</p>
|
|
<p>14:37 < Tracker> I guess I will be one of them.</p>
|
|
<p>14:37 < jrandom> perhaps. </p>
|
|
<p>14:38 < jrandom> we'll see as 0.6 is deployed whether thats the case, or whether we'll be able to work around the issues your isp has</p>
|
|
<p>14:38 < jrandom> ok, anything else on udp? or shall we move on to 5) ???</p>
|
|
<p>14:39 < jrandom> consider us moved</p>
|
|
<p>14:39 < jrandom> 5) ??</p>
|
|
<p>14:39 < jrandom> anyone have anything else to bring up?</p>
|
|
<p>14:40 < Teal`c> is the pizza here yet ?</p>
|
|
<p>14:40 < Jhor> anybody know where i should look to find/debug problems in bittorrent?</p>
|
|
<p>14:41 < jrandom> Jhor: in i2p-bt, a good place to start would likely be adding in some logging to tell you what BT messages are sent/received, so we know where its blocking/timing out/etc</p>
|
|
<p>14:41 < jrandom> (assuming you mean i2p-bt and not azneti2p?)</p>
|
|
<p>14:42 < Jhor> yeah, i2p-bt. what are the different spew levels?</p>
|
|
<p>14:42 < jrandom> no idea, all i know is --spew 1</p>
|
|
<p>14:42 < Jhor> Ok, I'll try that</p>
|
|
<p>14:43 * Jhor prepares for a crash course in python</p>
|
|
<p>14:43 < jrandom> :)</p>
|
|
<p>14:44 < jrandom> ok, anybody else have something to discuss?</p>
|
|
<p>14:44 * cervantes wheels out the Strand Gong</p>
|
|
<p>14:44 < jrandom> we're around the 60m mark, so a pretty good rate</p>
|
|
<p>14:44 < Teal`c> when is udp due for general consumption ?</p>
|
|
<p>14:44 < jrandom> Teal`c: april</p>
|
|
<p>14:44 < jrandom> thats 0.6, we're still working on 0.5</p>
|
|
<p>14:45 < Teal`c> nice work.</p>
|
|
<p>14:46 < jrandom> progress, ever onwards</p>
|
|
<p>14:46 * jrandom winds up</p>
|
|
<p>14:46 * jrandom *baf*s the gong, closing the meeting</p>
|
|
</div>
|
|
{% endblock %} |