not_bob
Is i2p more unstable than usual?
weko
not_bob_1fk: yes
zzz
would it be worth it to compile an additional list of routers to ban in the release? e.g. Yh~y~dXoUyqZaPU-gei38lsyn6nMli93gkfPR8bQmrQ= ? or waste of time?
dr|z3d
maybe just throttle L tier routers sooner, zzz, so you don't have to maintain a list.
zzz
so far I see periodic bursts from various routers, but nothing sustained like our two friends
dr|z3d
I'm temp banning L tier routers if they make more than 5 requests in 220 seconds. seems to be working well enough.
zzz
interesting. I don't know if I want to do all that in the throttler
zzz
I'm also wary of making broad changes that could make the congestion worse
zzz
I'm pretty risk-averse at this point
dr|z3d
understandable.
dr|z3d
having L tier temp banning in play for a few days now, the hit rate is pretty low.
dr|z3d
at a rough guess, ~30 temp bans per hour on one router.
dr|z3d
at the other end, the relaxed throttle for O,P,X means I'm very rarely seeing those tier routers throttled.
zzz
another topic:
zzz
dark theme graphs
zzz
we have CSS filter: invert(1); mix-blend-mode: lighten
zzz
I'd say the results are ok but could be better, esp. the text
zzz
you have anything better in cannon?
dr|z3d
yeah. custom palettes.
zzz
in the CSS or the image generation?
dr|z3d
3 iirc.
zzz
?
zzz
I think for better results I would want to change the colors in SummaryRenderer based on theme, rather than post-render CSS tweaks
dr|z3d
at the rrd4j end of the deal. css filter hackers are just that. hacks.
zzz
that would also make image save-as get you what you would expect
dr|z3d
exactly.
zzz
ok so that's what cannon is doing in SummaryRenderer now?
zzz
the green-on-black part. tunnel chart you sent me, was that dark or midnight?
lbt
Hey :) Quick question: Is there actually still a need for more reseeds?
zzz
sure, network is growing, and who knows if a current one might vanish
lbt
Ok, I'll look into it and get back to you about it then.
dr|z3d
green on black is our dark theme.
dr|z3d
12K known peers is plenty.
dr|z3d
actually, it's green on a semi-transparent background, the black was added in gimp.
zzz
you more proud of the dark or midnight graphs, if I were to pick one to buy back?
dr|z3d
neither will suit your purposes, you want to customize the colors according to your dark theme.
zzz
ok. the green seems a little much. guess I'll try both
dr|z3d
add a placeholder box in the sidebar, fill it with whatever you think will make a good graph color, tweak until it looks ok. that's what I'd do in your situation.
dr|z3d
if it looks good in the sidebar, it'll do just fine as a standalone palette.
dr|z3d
the graph axis and secondary graph color (bandwidth line) should complement the primary color choice. for complimentary colors, I find w3schools.com/colors/colors_picker.asp is often useful.. allows you to pick shades of the main color.
lbt
What's the status on the reseed policy draft there is on the forums? According to it IP logging of any kind needs to be disabled, is that what I should look into doing then?
lbt
And zzz.i2p/files/RESEED-POLICY.md is a dead link in zzz.i2p/topics/2912-reseed-policy-draft btw
lbt
I'm aware of that, but the policy is not included there yet - neither is ipv6 I think
zzz
logging is not prohibited, but keep it to yourself
zzz
see Privacy Policy section
zzz
dr|z3d, what does CSS img:not(old) do?
dr|z3d
ensures css3 support.
zzz
ok
zzz
dark looks pretty good, only needs some minor tweaks to my eye
zzz
but basically it's green instead of brown graphs
zzz
want to review a screenshot?
ReturningNovice
that'd be lovely. :)
zzz
"I2P+ is licensed under the AGPL v.3"
zzz
I'm not sure if cannon can even do that legally
zzz
nor do I know if it's compatible with canon
zzz
if a fork relicensed to make it incompatible for buying back changes, that's kindof a dick move
zzz
however I will have to abandon the effort due to licensing issues
ReturningNovice
That looks nice. dr|z3d should be happy with attribution in code comments or docs. (IMHO)
ReturningNovice
isn't this a dick move free zone?
ReturningNovice
afterall, your deep understanding of the code is proprietary in a sense, and you share it freely.
zzz
based on quick research, the Plus license of AGPL v3 is a) not legal for GPLv2-only code in canon and b) a dick move as we can't take anything back
dr|z3d
it's AGPL unless otherwise stated. and was never intended as a "dick move" to prevent upstream usage.
zzz
pretty sure you can't incorporate GPLv2-only code in a AGPLv3-licensed work
ReturningNovice
amendments?
zzz
noticed this long ago but didn't want to make a stink. I guess now is the time
dr|z3d
well you're certainly making a stink.
ReturningNovice
air things out before the new year starts. :)
zzz
almost all of canon code is either PD or GPL v2 with "any later version", so you can take it, we just can't take anything back
dr|z3d
just work on the assumption that anything already licensed remains under the same license. I won't sue you.
zzz
however there are numerous GPLv2-only dependencies, which are your problem not mine
ReturningNovice
what about a one liner amendment such as; all code herein is exempted for use by cannon (upstream? downstream?)
zzz
I get it you weren't trying to be a dick but it's an awkward situation
zzz
I'll have to research if it's even possible for cannon to grant canon a special license or exception
ReturningNovice
if there's conflicts wouldn't those invalidate the licesnce anyway?
dr|z3d
afaik, author of license can vary license as they see fit.
zzz
in theory, cannon's rights to use any GPLv2-only code is terminated upon violation. GPLv2 par. 4
dr|z3d
that's assuming a violation. like I said, where a pre-existing license exists, code exists under that license. if someone's going to hunt me down for license violations, let's go :)
ReturningNovice
heheh
zzz
just saying, AGPLv3 was a poor choice at best, a violation at worst
dr|z3d
maybe, or maybe this is all just a storm in a teacup. what I've written in the legal help section is the following:
dr|z3d
> The Router Console and web application themes, in addition to the overall user experience, are courtesy of dr|z3d, licensed under the Affero GPLv3. The custom I2PSnark graphics supplied with I2P+, and the itoopie+ logo are not licensed for reuse unless explicit permission is granted, and are currently an I2P+ exclusive (the Fugue icon set is used under a Creative Commons v3 license).
dr|z3d
> For a more extensive list of licenses in use, see the license document. For details on other applications available, as well as their licenses, please see the license policy. Additional licenses can be found in the licenses sub-directory of your I2P installation.
zzz
agreed your chance of getting found and sued by a GPLv2 dependency is zero
ReturningNovice
so an explicit exemption for cannon to use specified parts should fix, no?
zzz
inside canon code itself, susimail and susidns are GPLv2-only and so you're violating the licensing on canon's work
obscuratus
From what I recall, to bring GPLv3 code into GPLv2, the original author of the GPLv3 code should re-license or dual license the code. Otherwise the GPLv2 code *BECOMES* GPLv3 code. That's the viral way GPLv3 is written (I think).
obscuratus
Many GPLv2 projects (such as the linux kernel) avoid GPLv3 like the plague, due to it's viral facets.
zzz
GPLv2-only code cannot "become" v3
obscuratus
I think that compatability matrix is in agreement with what I said. If you combine GPLv2 and GPLv3, the combined work is GPLv3 (if I'm reading that correctly).
obscuratus
Yes, and GPLv2-only code cannot be combined.
not_bob
I'm glad to see that it's not just me.
zzz
I want to copy code under: GPLv2 only I want to license my code under: GPLv3 or later -> NO
zzz
that's what cannon is doing
not_bob
zzz: Thank you for the update on the forum.
obscuratus
Question: Is a GPLv2 work considered GPLv2-only unless it explicitly states something like GPLv2 or later?
zzz
now, to take cannon changes back, yes, we need some sort of grant, if it's possible
zzz
yes obscuratus
zzz
np not_bob
obscuratus
I've seen it done in the linux kernel where someone will supply a patch (usually inadvertantly) under GPLv3, and they usually politely insist they resubmit their work under GPLv2. I think the original author usually has flexibility to release their work under multiple licenses.
zzz
dr|z3d, re: your legal help sections, there are two problems:
zzz
1) you're vaguely defining what parts are AGPLv3
zzz
2) you can't do that because it's a combined work with GPLv2-only
dr|z3d
I respectfully disagree, zzz. the susi* license explicitly permits a later version of the gpl.
dr|z3d
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
dr|z3d
* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
dr|z3d
* the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
dr|z3d
* (at your option) any later version.
dr|z3d
notwithstanding, just let me know what kind of license extension you want and I'll write it up.
obscuratus
dr|z3d: Yeah, that's the thing. The GPLv2 license needs to explicitly incorporate terminology such as "either version 2 of the license, or any later version".
obscuratus
I2P doesn't have that (most of it was written before people even thought about that).
obscuratus
It's not inherently part of the GPLv2, it needs to be scabbed on.
dr|z3d
actually, where the gpl is specified, "any later version" I've found in 2 separate sub-components, and I haven't looked hard.
dr|z3d
or 3 if you count susidns and susimail as separate components. i2ptunnel also.
obscuratus
An interesting problem in the context of I2P, you need the original authors permission to make those changes. We don't even know who the original authors are for some of this stuff.
dr|z3d
in the absence of an explicit license, public domain is assumed.
dr|z3d
still, I can't get excited about these things. send the lawyers over if you're unhappy. otherwise, like I said, I'm happy to write up a variation of the license for canon.
obscuratus
It still means your code is dead to us as far as porting it back to canon I2P.
obscuratus
We really shouldn't even be looking at it.
dr|z3d
read what I just wrote.
zzz
ok, so the only non-dependency GPLv2-only thing I see is welterde's UDP and streamr which is a trivial portion
zzz
so, more or less, you're not violating i2p's licensing, just a boatload of dependencies
dr|z3d
except I'm not relicensing those dependencies, existing licenses prevail.
zzz
it's a combined work, so it's not legal. FYI only, not my problem
zzz
but if you don't plan to rectify it, some sort of grant to upstream and its users would be the way for us to incorporate your improvements
zzz
looking for the legal advice zab paid $10k for, can't find it...
zzz
no luck
zzz
dr|z3d, I assume the vast majority of cannon changes are by you, and others' contributions are zero or negligible?
dr|z3d
fair assumption
zzz
ok
zzz
do you plan to relicense your project to correct the incompatibility with v2-only dependencies, or should we take you up on your offer to grant canon an exception?
dr|z3d
probably the latter. I'm not persuaded what I'm doing is wrong, there's enough advice out there that suggests GPl2 to 3 is legit. So I can write up an exception and throw it into the console legal section.
zzz
ok. not my problem to persuade you. I'll craft the beginning of an exception text and give it to you to refine, unless you get to it first
dr|z3d
"For upstream I2P, permission is granted to use I2P+ modifications under the license of the existing code, where applicable."
dr|z3d
if that's sufficient, I can push that to my legal page.
obscuratus
Isn't the issue that the existing code now has the GPLv3 license?
zzz
yes obscuratus but as effectively the sole copyright holder / author, he has the right to relicense or grant exceptions
zzz
"License exception: I2P+ is a derived work of I2P ("upstream"). Permission is granted to upstream to incorporate I2P+ modifications under the license of the applicable upstream subsystem as specified in LICENSE.txt"
dr|z3d
Sure, if you're happy with that I can make it happen.
zzz
I think that's pretty close to what we'd need on canon side, but no rush if you want to mull it over or do more research to ensure your rights are protected and goals are met
dr|z3d
nah, no need to mull it over. it's fine. was never my intention to frustrate buy back.
dr|z3d
here's your green light: gitlab.com/i2pplus/I2P.Plus/-/merge_requests/3339/diffs?commit_id=668c2242b267a78b59d4ba671dd802e512deb33c
zzz
great, thank you
ReturningNovice
Σ:Ð \o/
weko
What you think about I2NP extending?
zzz
extending what? or how?
weko
I2NP. Packet, sending on tunnel, for get some messages from tunnels's transit routers
weko
For example, router shutdown message
zzz
we've made I2NP changes many many times before :) i2p-projekt.i2p/spec/i2np ... write up your proposal and post it on my forum
weko
Okay, nice.