On 01/06/2014 09:00 PM, Steve Dougherty wrote: > TheSeeker points out a bug in negtype 10 that only affects seednodes. > We're investigating and may have to release another update.
Our current understanding is that when a 1458 node attempts to connect to a seed node with negtype 10 the seed node logs an error, and the client seems to fall back to another negtype. This means on seed nodes there is log spew of (freenet.node.FNPPacketMangler, UdpSocketHandler for port XXXXXX, ERROR): Unknown neg type: 10 but seeding still seems to function. TheSeeker wrote a patch that avoids the message and presumably allows seed nodes to use negtype 10 with clients. [0] Given that this does not disrupt network function and only affects seed nodes, (and even then not severely) it would make sense to me to wait until the next (hopefully soon) release to include this fix. In terms of the code that allowed this to happen I think it'd be good to have an isValidNegtype() function to avoid duplication of such conditions and add seed node tests. Are there longer-running seed node tests already that aren't part of the standard test suite? Would it be appropriate to run them when making a release? Is the load on seed nodes after an update problematically high? Would it help to have nodes wait a random interval after fetching an update before restarting? - Steve [0] https://github.com/freenet/fred-staging/commit/2faae2b00b8c56d2db8b157e8f95c8bb12f97303
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
