Matthias wrote:
Martin Stone Davis schrieb:
(Just post to one list... let's not crosspost!)
Ok, let's continue this here. It wasn't my intention to crosspost.
Maybe you should post part of your servlet/nodestatus/ocmContents.html
to show what you're talking about. The developers will have
On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 03:43, Martin Stone Davis wrote:
Matthias wrote:
Martin Stone Davis schrieb:
I attached the lines of the ocmContents.html (running 6221 now as advised
here) belonging to this node. It's taken about 20 minutes after I took it
out of my Firewall. There were just 8
Edward J. Huff schrieb:
On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 03:43, Martin Stone Davis wrote:
(I probably should have mentioned: most people on the list appear to not
like html posts, so configure your browser to use text-only when you do
post here. I got my wrists slapped a couple of times for that.)
But
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 12:43:50AM -0700, Martin Stone Davis wrote:
Matthias wrote:
Martin Stone Davis schrieb:
(Just post to one list... let's not crosspost!)
Ok, let's continue this here. It wasn't my intention to crosspost.
Maybe you should post part of your
(Just post to one list... let's not crosspost!)
Matthias wrote:
Martin Stone Davis schrieb:
DOS is supposed to be hard to do against freenet. You probably have
the stable (5028) build. Try the unstable version, which closes these
dead connections. If that fixes it, you should remove the
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 06:30:48PM -0700, pineapple wrote:
My question is simple: WHY is the network currently
broken? If no one answers this question then the
chances of fixing the network seems very remote. So
far the only answer seems to be bugs. Not only is
this answer useless, it's
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 07:49:00AM +0200, Niklas Bergh wrote:
Currently toad is working on a thing called PeerHandler. The goal with PH is
mostly to make maintenance and debugging of node connections/message sending
and queueing code more feasible (this was really, sorely, overdue). When
this
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 07:53:31AM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
On October 05, 2003 09:30 pm, pineapple wrote:
My question is simple: WHY is the network currently
broken? If no one answers this question then the
chances of fixing the network seems very remote. So
far the only answer
Martin Stone Davis schrieb:
(Just post to one list... let's not crosspost!)
Ok, let's continue this here. It wasn't my intention to crosspost.
Maybe you should post part of your servlet/nodestatus/ocmContents.html
to show what you're talking about. The developers will have an easier
time
Let's everyone please agree not to start a flame war here.
http://members.aol.com/intwg/flamewars.htm
Thanks
-Martin
Tim McGrath wrote:
On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 01:52, Tracy R Reed wrote:
The developers need to decide whether freenet is ready for general use or
not. They have led a lot of people
Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 02:24:58PM -0500, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
Incidentally, I backed off to version 6219, and am no longer constantly
QueryRejecting (but not having any successful incoming requests, either),
so...something clearly broke in that regard between
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 04:18:12PM -0700, Martin Stone Davis wrote:
Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 02:24:58PM -0500, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
Well, *that* was a bad idea. :-) I'd forgotten that version 6217 had the
ever-diminishing CPU usage problem, i.e., after
On October 05, 2003 08:23 pm, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 04:18:12PM -0700, Martin Stone Davis wrote:
Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 02:24:58PM -0500, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
Well, *that* was a bad idea. :-) I'd forgotten that version 6217 had
My question is simple: WHY is the network currently
broken? If no one answers this question then the
chances of fixing the network seems very remote. So
far the only answer seems to be bugs. Not only is
this answer useless, it's counter productive since it
diverts people's attention from what
Hi,
it seems like my first Message didn't come through. So I send it again:
is it possible that there is some type of attack going on against
freenet? My permanent node was for 10 days totally blocked by a
node running on IP 210.55.107.146. This node was eating up every
allowed incoming
Matthias wrote:
Hi,
it seems like my first Message didn't come through. So I send it again:
is it possible that there is some type of attack going on against
freenet? My permanent node was for 10 days totally blocked by a
node running on IP 210.55.107.146. This node was eating up every
allowed
Hi,
is it possible that there is some type of attack going on against
freenet? My permanent node was for 10 days totally blocked by a
node running on IP 210.55.107.146. This node was eating up every
allowed incoming connection slot of my node, up to a point where
no other node could connect any
Martin Stone Davis schrieb:
DOS is supposed to be hard to do against freenet. You probably have the
stable (5028) build. Try the unstable version, which closes these
dead connections. If that fixes it, you should remove the block in
your firewall. Download:
I am running the unstable build
for the reasons for
the current problems (=actual debugging).
regards
/N
- Original Message -
From: pineapple [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 3:30 AM
Subject: [freenet-dev] Re: Why is Freenet so sick at the moment?
My question is simple: WHY is the network
19 matches
Mail list logo
