#ls2 (irc2p) | #ls2 proposal review channel : Reviews Tuesdays 7 PM UTC: none scheduled

dr|z3d CRIT […eTimer2 4/4] …til.SimpleTimer2: SimpleTimer2: Timed task net.i2p.router.transport.udp.PeerState2$ACKTimer@5686a7c4 exited unexpectedly, please report

dr|z3d java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: Index 11 out of bounds for length 8

dr|z3d at net.i2p.router.transport.udp.SSU2Bitfield.set(SSU2Bitfield.java:103)

dr|z3d at net.i2p.router.transport.udp.PacketBuilder2.buildPacket(PacketBuilder2.java:301)

dr|z3d at net.i2p.router.transport.udp.PacketBuilder2.buildPacket(PacketBuilder2.java:143)

dr|z3d at net.i2p.router.transport.udp.PacketBuilder2.buildACK(PacketBuilder2.java:346)

dr|z3d at net.i2p.router.transport.udp.PeerState2$ACKTimer.timeReached(PeerState2.java:782)

dr|z3d at net.i2p.util.SimpleTimer2$TimedEvent.run2(SimpleTimer2.java:501)

dr|z3d at net.i2p.util.SimpleTimer2$TimedEvent.run(SimpleTimer2.java:440)

dr|z3d at java.base/java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:539)

dr|z3d at java.base/java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264)

dr|z3d at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:304)

dr|z3d at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136)

dr|z3d at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635)

dr|z3d at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833)

orignal 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Block type 12 of size 5

orignal 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Ack

orignal 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Block type 4 of size 1313

orignal 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: First fragment

orignal 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Block type 5 of size 60

orignal 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Follow-on fragment

orignal zzz, why is it?

orignal so, I receive packet of 1313 + 5 bytes

orignal and last fragment of 60

orignal why was it split by two?

orignal I beleive there is plenty of room

orignal for send it as signle block

orignal never mind, because max payload size=1340

orignal wiht MTU 1420

zzz thanks dr|z3d thats a new one

dr|z3d that's on an up-to-date router, zzz.

zzz ok

dr|z3d the error occurred 1/2 dozen times in the space of a couple of minutes, then stopped.

orignal erorr from me

zzz what?

orignal it was a question

orignal if this error came from me

zzz no, almost certainly not. looks like a synchronization or race issue

zzz dr|z3d, what's your PeerState2 log level? wondering if you have any nearby logging

dr|z3d all turned off, zzz

zzz ok. stumped atm

dr|z3d I'll enable PeerState2 debug logging to see if we can shed some light. I was keeping an eye on participating throttler, so didn't want to choke up the logs. That issue appears to have passed.

zzz it's gonna be tough. the best I can do maybe to add more logging to the code if it happens again

dr|z3d critical level is good, doesn't get lost in the flow then.

dr|z3d orignal: no idea, didn't have the requisite logging enabled.

zzz its a headscratcher because I'm not off by 1, I'm off by 4

dr|z3d oh, and what zzz said.

zzz dr|z3d, java version?

orignal i2p+?

dr|z3d OpenJDK Runtime Environment 18-ea+36-Ubuntu-1

zzz x86_64?

dr|z3d yup, 64bit.

dr|z3d coreisbr Ivy Bridge [Jcpuid version: 3]

dr|z3d obviously I2P+, orignal :)

eyedeekay I am not going to make the meeting today

eyedeekay Best I can tell I've got 6-8 hours left, but I don't know when/how much I took

eyedeekay Very good quality though

dr|z3d what you taken, eyedeekay? acid? :)

eyedeekay Yeah not sure when but I think somewhere between 5-8 of the size doses I used to take in college

zzz lol how was hope?

eyedeekay High end of as much as I've ever taken

eyedeekay Fun, as you might imagine

zzz you home safe or still on the loose in NYC?

eyedeekay Spent a lot of time meeting people, volunteered a bit, and at about 1 last night, realized I was high as kite

orignal what happened?

dr|z3d sounds like someone enhanced eyedeekay's beer.

eyedeekay Not sure. I helped clean up and picked up a ton of tiny pieces of cardstock

eyedeekay Might have done it to myself

zzz where are you?

orignal seems in Harlem ))

eyedeekay I'm in my hotel restaurant getting breakfast

zzz should we send zlatinb_ over to check on you?

eyedeekay Nah I'm fine this is not my first rodeo

zzz got Sav there with you?

eyedeekay Yeah we're both here

zzz she got it together or is it a double shitshow?

dr|z3d positive vibes, zzz. it's not a shitshow, it's a dance in the clouds :)

eyedeekay She says she's all right too

zzz ok, if you need anything holler and I'll get zlatinb_ up on signal. have fun

eyedeekay Yeah I'm well into the groove of it now, just got to be careful in this heat

zzz found the bug dr|z3d, thanks again

zzz wasn't the issue, but you might want to update your JRE since you're on a EA

dr|z3d oh, good that you found the bug. great. re JRE, I'm waiting for the repo to update. this is Ubuntu Kinetic, so I'm a little surprised it isn't already updated.

dr|z3d oh, or maybe this is the one box I didn't update to kinetic. let's get that in motion.

zzz debian has 18.0.2, yeah, kinetic has 18.0.1

zzz 36ea is jammy

dr|z3d I usually give the latest dev release a couple of months to bed in and then update. usually fine.

zzz sure, jammy just went unsupported a few days ago

zzz which is why I started looking at the ruby2.7 issue

dr|z3d jammy unsupported? how so? that's current.

dr|z3d or you mean wrt ruby?

zzz oh sorry I meant impish

zzz 21.10

dr|z3d yeah, right. jammy is LTS afaik.

zzz gotta move that box to jammy at some point. not a crisis but on the list

dr|z3d as for ruby, a snap is probably your best bet, then you get to keep it updated without too much effort.

dr|z3d "snap refresh" or whatever the command is.

zzz well there's lots of ways to do it, but first have to see if it works

dr|z3d > Fetched 784 MB in 6s (62.9 MB/s)

dr|z3d entire upgrade took around 7 minutes. not bad.

zzz I did it on one box the other day, took 5 hours

dr|z3d ouch

dr|z3d interesting error #31:

dr|z3d …ntcp.EventPumper: Error in the event pumper

dr|z3d java.lang.NullPointerException

dr|z3d at net.i2p.router.transport.ntcp.NTCPConnection.sendTermination(NTCPConnection.java:917)

dr|z3d at net.i2p.router.transport.ntcp.NTCPConnection.sendTerminationAndClose(NTCPConnection.java:884)

dr|z3d at net.i2p.router.transport.ntcp.EventPumper.run(EventPumper.java:335)

dr|z3d at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)

dr|z3d at net.i2p.util.I2PThread.run(I2PThread.java:103)

dr|z3d if (port <= 0 || ip == null)

dr|z3d throw new IOException("Invalid NTCP address: " + naddr);

dr|z3d kinetic's still on EA builds. slack fsckers. Private Build 18.0.1-ea (OpenJDK Runtime Environment 18.0.1-ea+10-Ubuntu-1)

dr|z3d that event pumper npe looks like it killed a good chunk of the router's traffic.

zzz dunno, at first glance it doesn't look possible

dr|z3d not seen it before, this much I know.

orignal is it NTCP or NTCP2?

zzz NTCP code is long gone

obscuratus I've run across routers with Port = 0, and no NTCP address. I think QPUV would occasionally show up that way. Let me see if I can find one.

obscuratus Oh, is this a NTCP v1 error?

obscuratus If I go to "All Routers with Full Stats", it's easy to do a search for "Port: 0". But it's always the SSU transport with Port=0. But there are several examples where the NTCP transport is published with no IP address.

orignal what's wrong with transports with port=0?

orignal It only means it's not reachable

obscuratus I'm just saying that be a possible explaination for the error dr|z3d is seeing.

obscuratus An unreachable transport without IP address or port published, making an inbound connection.

zzz port=0 is not legal

obscuratus zzz: Fair enough, but I see several examples in the wild.

zzz I assumed they were buggy i2pd forks, but if stock i2pd is publishing them that's a bug

zzz java may even ban them, not sure

orignal no I don't publish port = 0 at least since we started publishing caps 4 and 6

orignal the problem is

obscuratus So, when you're firewalled, are you supposed to publish a normal NTCP address, and let the SSU transport be the indicator to the rest of the world that you are firewalled?

orignal before we didn't have these caps

orignal and had to pubslish enpoint regardless if reachable or not

orignal NTCP or NTCP2?

obscuratus orignal: That question for me?

orignal yes

obscuratus NTCP2

orignal if firewalled it's published with caps 4 or 6 and s only

orignal if not no caps but valid enpoint and i

orignal SSU is more complicated

obscuratus So, in that case (when you are firewalled), you publish NCTP2 without IP address or port. So port=null instead of port=0?

orignal no port at all

orignal only caps, s and v

orignal for NTCP2

obscuratus orignal: When I see a router with "Port: 0", it's always on the SSU transport. You're saying that i2pd shouldn't do that?

orignal newer version

orignal that publish caps with 4 or 6

obscuratus I'm looking at a router right now (LUB8) that is showing version 0.9.54, that is apparently firewalled. It's IPv4 SSU transport (with caps B4) is showing Port: 17059. It's IPv6 SSU transport (with caps B6) is showing Port: 0

obscuratus orignal: So not a vanilla i2pd router?

orignal shouldn't be

orignal let me check

orignal it it shown 0 it's bug

zzz speaking of 0

zzz 0) Hi

zzz hi

orignal hi

zzz what's on the list for today?\

orignal SSU2 status

zzz idk and zab are on the road

zzz status is 1)

zzz I'll add 2) response to SSU2 termination (mentioned last week)

orignal where is everybody?

zzz NYC for HOPE

orignal nice

zzz idk said it was good, zab told me it wasn't

zzz anyway

orignal NYC or HOPE?

zzz HOPE

orignal NYC is never good in my opinion ))

zzz not in this heat. but zab lived there for years, I don't think he has anything against it

zzz anyway

zzz 1) SSU2 status

zzz my turn I guess

orignal so I have implemented introducers

orignal yes

zzz chasing minor bugs still, they're getting more rare

zzz I thought the remaining troublemaker was p~8- but ai see a couple more

zzz pretty low frequency though

orignal I guess after proper MTU

zzz I'm about to start taking a look at my data phase resending, I think I have some problems

orignal I need to looks at it too

zzz maybe MTU or maybe can't handle session confirmed fragmentation at all

orignal because I need to update Ack block that I don't do

zzz 4 weeks to the release, so I really want to chase the last problems down

zzz that's it for me, go ahead

orignal so

orignal 1. I have implemnetd introducers

orignal do you see any problem with i2pd router publishung SSU2 introducers yet?

zzz I haven't looked. Does it work on your side?

orignal will start testing soon

orignal I cann't fall to "Firewalled" state yet

orignal unfortunately peer test works too good for SSU2 ))

zzz lol please do your testing before you ask me to do it :)

orignal but will try to simulate it

orignal I don't ask you

orignal I ask you if you see any problems

orignal I saw some problems from others and fixed them

zzz what router hashes are publising introducers, and I'll look

orignal any of them

orignal I remeber one started with b5

orignal sometimes R4SAS's

zzz ok if you see any let me know

orignal I'm going to publish mine explicitly

orignal MNcW

zzz I have a list of about 40 SSU2 i2pd, don't see any b5

zzz ok

orignal I will let you know

orignal iNmq might publish now

zzz thanks. any other SSU2 status?

orignal yes

orignal I started replacing SSU by SSU2

orignal did it on 2RRY

orignal works well so far

zzz how are you doing on MTU changes/fixes?

orignal right now every ipv6 address will contain MTU for both SSU and SSU2

zzz ok. 1500 is default for SSU2, so you don't have to put it in there if 1500

orignal didn't have time to implement a code for ipv4 mtu detection

orignal but can I?

zzz sure, it's fine

zzz just a few wasted bytes, no big deal

orignal I think so too

orignal working on fragmented messages

orignal to not fill max payload if possible

orignal but deduct some random bytes

orignal also implemented reduced number of Ack tanges if need to fit into one message

zzz nice

orignal hope to porduce less fragmenetd messages

orignal but this morning issue

orignal I'm a little confused

orignal about 1313 and 60 frgegments

zzz huh?

orignal the main problem it was I2NP messages with RouterInfo

orignal <orignal> 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Block type 12 of size 5

orignal <orignal> 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Ack

orignal <orignal> 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Block type 4 of size 1313

orignal <orignal> 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: First fragment

orignal <orignal> 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Block type 5 of size 60

orignal <orignal> 07:41:26@853/debug - SSU2: Follow-on fragment

orignal I mean this one

orignal the message size was 1373

zzz I missed that, I was disconnected for a couple hours this morning

orignal I'm pretty sure it could fit it it was compressed

orignal I rememebr you said you never send RouterInfo block

orignal but I2NP messages intead

zzz right

orignal maybe time to change it?

zzz for now

orignal seconds fragment of 60 bytes for RI

orignal compression would help

zzz well, a database store message of a RI is compressed, right? so not too much difference?

orignal what compression level do you use there?

orignal as I remeber medium not high

orignal 60 bytes matter

zzz yeah I think it was 3

orignal yes, but 9 would produce 60 bytes less easily

zzz yes, 3

orignal I'm not sure I evern compress RI in database store

orignal just no compression

zzz 9 is about 4% smaller and 50% slower than 3 in my tests, but I can't remember what data I tested it on

orignal anyway, please think about such option

orignal if might reduce number of packets

zzz sure

zzz I have a proposal to reduce compressed RIs by hundreds of bytes, but I don't think we've talked about it

orignal 4% is around 60 for 1300 bytes ))

orignal about padding?

zzz yes

orignal we did talk

zzz oh yeah, we did, I forgot

orignal it was zlatin's idea

orignal well it might work ofc

orignal a next step

zzz yeah, we worked on it together

zzz I have a router out there with it enabled

zzz anything else on 1) SSU2 status?

orignal and how much the improvement?

orignal sec

orignal I think that's all from my side

zzz it's like 300 bytes

zzz ok

zzz 2) SSU2 termination response

orignal so around 25%?

zzz we said we'd think about it

orignal yes, I promised to make this list but didn't have time

zzz it's a fixed ~300 bytes savings

zzz no not the termination codes list

orignal asumme RI size like 1500

zzz the response to termination: an ack, another termination, or nothing

orignal oh yes

orignal tremination protocol

zzz so we have a code 1: Termination received. I think that's my preference, it's a little easier than an ack for me

orignal I prefer it too

zzz because with an ack, I have to remember what ack number I'm looking for

orignal we send it back to every termination, but 1

orignal let's do it

zzz just to review:

zzz QUIC says wait around for a while after closing. Whatever what you get, send another close

zzz the problem is "for a while". If you get a 'termination received' you can stop waiting

orignal I do it already

orignal if I'm in closing state I send termination again

orignal as we discussed

zzz I haven't done any of it yet

zzz but I think we're in agreement. I'll update the spec and try to code it, lets see how it works

orignal closing state might be up to 30 seconds

orignal yes

zzz one problem is now you have to decrypt the packets you get after closing, right? so you can see if it's a 'termination received' ?

orignal I decrypt as data packets

zzz ok. I promise I'll update the spec this week, no promises about coding it though

orignal but not sure if I actully do it. will check

zzz anything else on 2) ?

zzz anything else for the meeting?

orignal no

orignal one more thing

orignal release

zzz yeah

orignal what are you going to enable there for SSU2?

zzz let's put that on the agenda for next week. I have some thoughts but nothing concrete yet. ok?

orignal fine

zzz until I know how solid things are, it's hard to make a recommendation

zzz ok great

orignal because if I start replacing SSU by SSU2 for everytbody I want to make sure no network split

orignal e.g. Java router will not be able to reach i2pd

zzz seems too early for that

orignal no

orignal because i2pd's SSU is real shit

orignal SSU2 is better even now

zzz ok, let's see how it goes this week

zzz thanks, happy coding/testing

orignal obscuratus thank you for pointing to this bug

orignal will add check for valid host/port

obscuratus orignal: No problem.

orignal will commit