[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[GNUnet-developers] IPv6 (was: Re: Feature request -- better status info
[GNUnet-developers] IPv6 (was: Re: Feature request -- better status info)
Sat, 4 Jan 2003 22:42:01 -0500
On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 08:36:59PM +0100, Christian Grothoff wrote:
> Am Freitag, 3. Januar 2003 01:42 schrieben Sie:
> > Anyway, I would like gnunet-stats to give me more status info about what's
> > happening with the network, specifically broken out by peer. Minimally,
> > it would be nice to see the IP addresses of the nodes gnunetd is connected
> > to, but I'd like to be able to have peer-specific stats (throughput, bytes
> > transferred, counts of each type of request, connection uptime, etc).
> I've already got some code that will do something *similar*. It'll be in
> 0.5.1, but maybe without a tool to print those numbers.
You mean, you have code to internally track these stats? Or you have a
tool that lists current peers?
> -- but I suspect that it could take quite a bit of memory to take all of
> these statistics, which may require making this feature optional
256 peers * 8 counters * 4 byte words = 8k of memory, unless I'm missing
something? What do you mean by "naive way"?
> > If any developers are looking for a quick project, this likely wouldn't
> > take too long. I'd do it myself, but I haven't yet gotten very far on the
> > IPv6 transport so I shouldn't promise anything more. :-) -Nathan
> Well, I propose that if at some point this year we are both bored, we meet on
> IRC and "hack it up" together. I'll probably be busy at the beginning of the
> year, but the year is long...
I actually hacked out a crude patch on an 8-hour flight in November, but
never worked on it further. The patch just modified transports/udp.c to
wrap all protocol-specific structs with compiler macros, then changed the
Makefile to compile udp4.o with -DINET4 and udp6.o with -DINET6. This
works fine as long as you use different ports for the IPv4 transport and
the IPv6 transport so they don't conflict.
The reason I stopped working on it is because I wanted to let 0.5.0
stabilize and become popular (relatively speaking) before introducing
IPv6. Since it became clear that IPv6 would have to be implemented using
different GNUnet protocol numbers, there was no rush to get it working.
IPv6 networks can be finicky, and combining this with the buggy-ness of
the 0.5.0 core would have made testing very trying.
Once I figure out how this dlopen thing works, I'll do what you suggested
and make a module that gets shared by both udp4 and udp6 to share a socket
between them. I'll try to do it so it can be used by the TCP transport as
*** Help filter spam! PGP-sign your email.
*** Expand your PGP Web of Trust with http://www.biglumber.com/
Description: PGP signature
|[Prev in Thread]
||[Next in Thread]|
- [GNUnet-developers] IPv6 (was: Re: Feature request -- better status info),
Nathan Lutchansky <=