#ls2 (irc2p) | #ls2 proposal review channel

eyedeekay He's already going through the code and spotting things I probably should be doing, good to have somebody looking at it, his first PR is a refactor of some of the su3 code

eyedeekay That's about all for today

zzz ok, that's good news, another set of eyeballs on it and some coding would be a big boost

zzz let's start back from the top then

zzz 1) release planning

zzz the planned release is in 3 weeks

zzz probably won't be sooner... might be a week later? will have to decide soon

orignal up to you

orignal no rush this time

zzz the posted schedule in the proposal is for a full enabling of SSU2 in the release in 1.10 in November.

zzz we can, of course, do anything we want that's different

zzz so, what are people thinking for this release in 3 weeks?

orignal people want SSU2

orignal because it's much faster than SSU1

orignal R4SAS saw 1.7 megabytes/sec yesterday

zzz you have any test data on that?

zzz vs. what for SSU 1?

orignal not more than 200-300 K

orignal hence SSU2 speed is comprable with SSU2

orignal *NTCP2

zzz I want to throw out the option of something in between enable-for-all and opt-in-only... it could be enabled for some random %, similar to what we've done for rekeying

orignal what I think

orignal for new router always use SSU2 wthout SSU1

orignal for existing routers not sure

orignal enable SSU2 by default additional to SSU1 or let people do it manually

orignal honestly I would prefer replacement if SSU1 is not enabled explicitly

orignal but not sure

zzz for java, I don't have any way to disable SSU 1, and that wasn't in my plans until about a year from now

zlatinb if both are enabled which will be preferred?

zzz java prefers 2 over 1

T3s|4 hi zzz - sure I also want SSU2's speed benefits asap, but not until you're convinced it's stable. The random % rekeying caused no issues on any of my i2p installs - perhaps a similar rollout for SSU2 makes sense.

orignal I understand

zzz on the java side, SSU2 is about 40% slower than SSU1 on a testnet, last I tested

orignal but my question is if you are going to enable SSU2

orignal by default

zzz most likely because of a lack of an ack-immediate flag, which we haven't discussed yet, but that's unproven

zzz well, let's review where we're at

orignal our situation is different, since SSU1 is so bad

zzz - we've been testing since about March?

orignal it's always worth to use SSU2

zzz - about 75 routers in the test ever, maybe 25 are up at a time

zzz - peer test and relay seem to work but are lightly used, because of the low numbers

zzz - we're still finding bugs almost every day

zzz - there's no connection migration yet

RN Hey all. Been a bit since I spoke up. On for new routers, opt in for existing until stability is established, then gradual random...

zzz - Slower than SSU1, for java

zzz end of status

RN if it is already considered stable, then prominent notices in channel topics and news encouraging opt in...

zzz orignal, one thing, I think, is that if you enable it for everybody, you need to plan for maybe .1 and .2 releases a month apart

zzz as I think we will definitely find more bugs, maybe even bad ones

orignal my plan is to enable it for new routers only

orignal no I don't think so

orignal we have implemented almost everything

orignal and we still have one more month

zzz the other thing I'm concerned about is your windowing/flow control/retranmission code, we need to make sure you're not spamming the network with packets

orignal what's wrong with it now?

orignal it's not like SSU1

orignal RTT/RTO and window

zzz I only know what you said, that it didn't have anything yet, maybe that's old information

orignal I mentioned it last week

orignal zlatinb even helped me with RTO calculation algo

zzz ok. that stuff is not easy to get right, so if you have it all working that's great.

zzz you have any data on your retransmission % ?

orignal I copied it from streaming

orignal that worked for many years

orignal no, I didn't measure but will do

RN actually... enabling for new installs before stability is established could lead to bad first impressions... perhaps in install dialouge about it explaining it is still in testing and the option for new install to choose

zzz so, if our goal is to enable it for everybody in November, what % do we need to enable it for in August to have everything well-tested by November?

zlatinb that's the question isn't it

orignal I think it's up to you

zzz is new-installs only enough? too much? not enough?

orignal because i2pd alwyas prefers NTCP2

orignal but you prefer SSU

zlatinb you don't want to single out new installs either

orignal that's the problem

eyedeekay i2p.firefox has got a smaller install base and am still labeled a beta

eyedeekay I can't speak to the effect on the network

eyedeekay if what we want is testing I could enable it there

eyedeekay *is

orignal also cost

orignal should we change it?

zzz Maybe 5 or 10% of the net (a few thousand routers) is a good target?

zzz that's up from maybe 0.1% now

orignal for me even few hundreds is enough

T3s|4 on the i2p-java side, it would be great if there was a dead-drop simple way to allow users in 1.9 to enable both opt-in and opt-out (the default) for SSU2 testing participation, perhaps a new in /confignet. If that SSU2 opt-in capability is added, it needs to be explicitly highlighted in the release news.

zzz well, it's opt-in now via advanced config

zzz I could also do something like 1% at every restart, and once it's on it's on for good, kinda like rekeying

zzz otherwise if it's not sticky, that leads to more issues at restart

T3s|4 yep zzz - understood, and enabled here - just trying to see if there is an easy to enlarge the tester database

T3s|4 easy *way to

zzz at this point the way to enlarge it is to make it automatic

zzz we might get 2x more with more outreach, but I think we're looking at more like 10-100x more

orignal we might also replace it for android

orignal due the CPU usage of SSU1

zzz not a bad idea

orignal alsways replace SSU1 by SSU2 there

zzz so let's leave this as the tentative proposal for now... 1% chance of enabling at every restart, "sticky"... and review it next week?

zzz or anybody else have a concrete proposal?

orignal no, that's just my plan for now

zzz ok, not claiming it's great, but it's something to start from, we can always tweak it in the next 3 weeks

zzz anything else on 1) ?

orignal no

T3s|4 nope; sounds fair and balanced

zzz thanks to RN and T3s|4 for your comments and suggestions

zzz 2) connection migration / path challenge/response

zzz I really got in deep on it in the last week

orignal yes please xplain what need to be done

zzz the QUIC specs are confusing, not entirely consistent, and I'm not sure even the people that wrote it understand it

zzz so I tried to simplify it and I added a section to our spec

zzz for review at some point

zzz but the plan was always to do it after the release

zzz the one thing we need now is very simple>

zzz when you get a path challenge (which is a PING) send a path response (which is a PONG) containing the same dat

zzz *data

zzz everything else can wait, that's enough for us to do the rest of it later

orignal fine. will do

zzz super. if we have that in before the release, then we'll have a bunch of routers that will PONG, and we can do the rest of it

orignal no problem

orignal will try to do it in next couple days

zzz and if you have time, please review the connection migration section, we'll talk about it in a week or two. eyedeekay you too, I think you had interest in it way back

eyedeekay Yes I did, will do

zzz maybe it makes sense, maybe not

zzz anything else on 2) ?

orignal no

zzz anything else for the meeting?

zzz eyedeekay, heads up, I put StormyCloud on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting

eyedeekay Yeah I saw, re-read their TOS and stuff to prep

eyedeekay Thanks zzz

zzz orignal, if you have any interest in the outproxy, you may wish to attend our monthly meeting tomorrow in #i2p-dev

orignal what;s about it?

zzz we're looking to make it our default in java

zzz so we're going to review it

zzz ok, that's it for this meeting, thanks everybody

orignal which one?

orignal puroskishi?

zzz no. stormycloud

orignal let me try

orignal what's the address?

zzz you'll need to do your own testing and negotiations with them, not doing that for you :)

orignal no problem

zzz exit.stormycloud.i2p is the outproxy. stormycloud.i2p is the ToS and other info

orignal mtproxy?

zzz there's 8 months worth of discussions on my forum about it

zzz you'll have to ask them about the technology, I've been doing black box testing

orignal I will ask

orignal because mtproxy is also worth

orignal as you know many government monkeys like to block telegram

orignal what time is tommorow?

eyedeekay 8UTC

eyedeekay PM

zzz orignal, I believe the implementation is similar to purokishi;s

orignal what is in EST?

zzz 4:00 our time

zzz orignal, did you say a release in 3 weeks, about Aug. 22, is ok for you guys?

R4SAS hi

zzz R4SAS, Aug. 22 ok for you?

R4SAS I think I'll as always start at sunday - 08/21, so it is.

R4SAS ok for me, but <see above>

zzz ok great. 3 more weeks of bug fixes!

orignal fine

zzz ok. of course if we run into problems we can always push it, let's see how it goes

orignal I will be busy ar 4 unfortunately

zzz ok, the logs will be posted after the meeting on our website, and there's lots of background on my forum

zzz in case I wasn't clear, what I was proposing for the "sticky 1%" ssu2 enable, more or less:

zzz if (getConfig("i2np.ssu2.enable") == null && random(100) == 0) {

zzz setConfig("i2np.ssu2.enable", "true");

zzz saveConfig()

zzz }

orignal 1/100 ?

zzz yup

zzz 1% at every restart, save it if now enabled

zzz so it will stay enabled

zzz if you want more routers, make it 2 or 5 or 10%. Remember only half of the routers are on the latest release 3 months later... so 1% may be too low... I'll think about it

zzz and we don't have to do the same %. You could do more than me

obscuratus If you add instructions for how to enable ssu2 in the news release for 1.8.0, I'll bet you'll get a fair number of people enabling it on their own.