IRCaBot 2.1.0
GPLv3 © acetone, 2021-2022
#i2p-dev
/2023/09/08
mesh ls -l
mesh whups
RN ls -AFGhlp
RN alias="ls -pG"
RN oh, wrong window
zzz yes, somewhere in client manager code is where you want to create/destroy subdbs
zzz look for where the per-client SKMs are created/killed
zzz but before we all dive deep into it I think you guys should do some high level planning and push out the current schedule significantly, to vastly increase testing and mitigate risk
eyedeekay Updated the forum announcement with new dates
zzz ok. I'm adding a big comment to #406 now
zzz what version is git.idk.i2p running because I'm still getting 100% POST failure rate
eyedeekay 2.3.0 from the deb repo
zzz thanks, on my list to chase down
eyedeekay Let me look at the limiters too
zzz hi obscuratus
zzz updated #406 with a big comment for you
zzz just entered #410 with more headscratchers, but still just throwing darts, don't fully have the big picture yet
eyedeekay I'll follow up on those issues with you with my reasoning and some commit hashes/merge references if it helps
zzz ok, but I think javadocs would best help clarify intent and make me smarter
zzz smart move to push out the release, good job, I think you'll need that time
eyedeekay Ack, I'll fix up the javadocs then
obscuratus zzz: I'm the one that added the methods to lookup by Hash. I was under the impression that, while we had a consistent dbid naming convention, it was best to assume the dbid could be any string. But we seem to have pivoted to a strict dbid naming convention.
orignal zzz, when are you ready to talk about SSU2?
obscuratus eyedeekay: Added another MR with two fixes I ran across. Let me know if you want the MR to go against another branch or repo.
eyedeekay For now just file them against master
obscuratus OK,I filed it against master in i2p-hackers/i2p.i2p. Let me know if it's better somewhere else.
zzz well, you need to have a strict naming convention for it all to work.
zzz if the dbid is just the b32 then why not pass in the hash to begin with and skip the hash-to-string conversion
zzz but that's just a detail.
zzz subsessions another wrinkle
zzz also, client-side lookups can be "out of session"
zzz orignal, can you give me a hint, what about SSU2 is the topic?
orignal zzz, there is a weakness in sesssion handshake
orignal that Bob's hash is never verified by Alice
orignal it means that Alice thing that she is connected to one Bob but avtually connected to another on the same endpoint
orignal and that what the last attack was about
orignal an advesary started producing fake floodfill with IPs of real floodfills
orignal simply speaking we need to pass additinal block with Bob's ident during handshake
zzz sounds familiar, didn't we talk about it back in Feb. or March?
zzz I also think I have some emails with idk about it
zzz have you written up a proposal?
orignal no, it was completely new
orignal from start of May
orignal I don't have a proposal because I want to discuss with you first
orignal not even sure if my idea is good
orignal that's why I need your opinion
zzz ok. give me a couple days to look, I know I talked about it with idk
zzz speaking of, did you two ever update the streaming proposal and streaming specs? or is that still on my ToDO list? ((
zzz I don't see any changes but perhaps one of you is working on it?
eyedeekay I've got a branch for it that I'll pick back up
eyedeekay Got distracted from it for a little while but I'm already started
zzz ok, it's kinda grunt work, so if you want to give it to me to finish I can, up to you
zzz would be good to get it done before we start talking about new flavors for ssu2 or datagrams
orignal couple day is fine. let me know
obscuratus eyedeekay: Let me know if you want me to take a swing at going over the places in FNDS where we iterate of all the netdbs.
obscuratus With the one I addressed in my last MR, I don't see the others popping up in my logs. They're not called regularly.
eyedeekay Yeah ideally we want to use them as little as possible or not have them at all, it's better to know what db we want to put any given ID in instead of trying to make the segmentor figure it out
obscuratus For most of those, it makes sense to constrain them to main. We already have companion calls that allow explicit identification of the client DBID for those places where it was needed.
eyedeekay Sometimes we can get the DBID out of the DatabaseEntry in the form of a hash, though, should we (ever)guess based on that? I think probably
obscuratus I've sort-of conceptualized the client netdb as being bundled with a client facade. Is there ever a case where there's not a one-to-one pairing?
zzz obscuratus, you can have a client before you have a "session", and you can have a client with multiple "subsessions" (hashes)
anonymousmaybe oh wow zzz alive, yo good to see you back
zzz thanks
zzz obscuratus, so those are some decisions to make
zzz note that all those FNDS loop-de-loops may be masking other bugs so I suggest you test the heck out of any changes you make there
anonymousmaybe btw your website still down
eyedeekay There's an argument to be made that isolating them above a certain level has diminishing returns, we briefly considered a global "clients" DBID because of how difficult it is to hide that clients share a host, but it was basically the same to isolate by key as it was to isolate by client
orignal both eepsites
zzz eyedeekay, yeah, just pointing out you should make an affirmative decision on what to do with subsessions and out-of-session lookups and document it,
zzz which is just another way of saying 'what is a dbid'
obscuratus What's an example of a client/service that employees subsessions? Maybe I can get it going on my testing network.
eyedeekay IIRC BiglyBT
zzz dont think so
zzz create a DSA-SHA1 server tunnel, and add an alternate Ed25519 private key file path
obscuratus Hhhmmm, my ZZZOT still has a DSA-SHA1 key. It might be easy. :)
eyedeekay zzz re: what is a dbid, it is a key used to define the subDb that is to be used, either "main" which is defined as the one which we use when we are a floodfill, or one created for a specific use, i.e. a destination. I used the string representation of the destination because I knew that even though 99% of the time I would need to create a dbid which corresponded to a destination, I would also need at
eyedeekay least one for the floodfill, I wasn't at the time sure if I would need one specifically for exploratory stuff, and because I had already had reproduced the issue I described to you in my last long email and why I didn't like the solution I slapped on(neither did you)
eyedeekay Not attempting to emulate the netDb's behavior and instead just maintaining a separate netDb just for them seemed like a better way
eyedeekay I'll explain on the issue what I mean, working on the javadoc now
zzz yeah ok, confession, the long email from a week ago was tldr, I could try again, more brainpower now
zzz obscuratus, you'd want to set it up in i2ptunnel gui, I doubt you want to research the config settings manually
zzz obscuratus, with subsessions, all dests share tunnels and a SKM, so my first guess is that they should also share a subnetdb, you just need to make a decision and then validate it does what you want
zzz eyedeekay, yeah, some alternatives to a dbid string you may or may not have considered: null dbid = main, or FAKE_HASH (AAAA...) = main, or "" = main, or separate methods (no dbid arg) for main
zzz I think the 'what is a dbid' isn't the biggest issue, it's more of a sign (together with the hash lookup methods) of things not quite being tight
zzz so I am a little poking at it with a stick, to be honest
zzz obscuratus hit it on the head. a subnetdb (== dbid) maps 1:1 to... what?