asciilifeform: http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2022-09-17#1113830 << the 2 tho not actually distinct entities
    
    dulapbot: Logged on 2022-09-17 21:42:25 mats: assigning blame to the wrong party here -- it is the government propping up this scheme, not bankers
    
    asciilifeform: and not simple matter of 'they ordered' -- reich cannot operate w/out printolade; printer cannot operate w/out the 'kinetic' component of fiatola hegemony
    
    asciilifeform: http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2022-09-17#1113834 << pretty close to the '% who eat recycled food' neh
    
    dulapbot: Logged on 2022-09-17 21:53:57 mats: in other news, TIL 73.6% of US adults over 20 are overweight or obese https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm
    
    asciilifeform: ( lulzily in ru to this day most common reason for rejecting a conscript is 'underweight' )
    
    asciilifeform: http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2022-09-17#1113837 << ru lost these colonies in sovok collapse, so they were picked up (originally by usg, nao cn will)
    
    dulapbot: Logged on 2022-09-17 21:55:14 mats: usg mouthpiece https://thediplomat.com/2022/07/china-kyrgyzstan-uzbekistan-railway-opportunities-and-challenges-for-china
    
    asciilifeform: mats: orthogonally, are you interested in getting on pestnet?
    
    asciilifeform: other folx would prolly comment interestingly re e.g. the noose linx mats digs up
    
    phf: awt, i seem to have lost peering. is your ip still 200.122.181.26?
    
    phf: actually not sure what happened but none of the peers on my list (ascii, trinque) respond
    
    phf: also i tried changing protocol versions, still nothing
    
    
    
    dulapbot: (pest) 2022-09-14 asciilifeform: PeterL: 100.15.116.69:1337
    
    asciilifeform rolled back to blatta 9973, which dun have addrcast yet
    
    asciilifeform: phf: does your cl pestron have it ?
    
    phf: to quote some 90s comedy "i ain't seeing shit"
    
    asciilifeform: phf: from all peers or only awt & asciilifeform ?
    
    phf: that's the only two peers i've ever really tested, so i'm not sure if other creds are still even legit
    
    asciilifeform: should be, if folx threw the keys in their stations, blatta dun have rekey yet
    
    phf: but i sent a couple of broadcast and prod messages to the ip you gave, with version FB, and i'm not getting any kind of reaction
    
    asciilifeform: phf: is yours in a nat ?
    
    phf: yes, but it's always been in a nat
    
    asciilifeform: hmm
    
    phf: i open up one socket, which i reuse for all things, and as soon as the socket is up, there's a 10s garbage packet going out to keep the outbound/inbound alive
    
    phf: but nothing has changed to this strategy
    
    asciilifeform: phf: in asciilifeform's at yer currently 137.103.133.228:16928 ( 17 july ) , which loox like an ephemeral port, it prolly closed
    
    asciilifeform: doesn't explain why not connects w/ asciilifeform's tho (oughta, asciilifeform put in a fwd rule)
    
    phf: the ip has also rotated, but that means that you're not getting anything from me, which should be at this point a mixture of garbage, broadcast and prod
    
    phf: what's the pest version number that your blatta.py says?
    
    phf: perhaps my upstream decided to filter suspicious udp packets
    
    asciilifeform: 9973
    
    phf: no, pest protocol
    
    asciilifeform: a hm
    
    asciilifeform: 0xfc
    
    asciilifeform: ( lives in message.py )
    
    phf: well, that didn't make any difference
    
    phf: would you kindly mind posting your at table to a paste
    
    phf: i suspect you have fresh awt ip there also
    
    phf: when i finish my pest™ it'll have a web accessible at table, for bootstrapping
    
    asciilifeform: phf: try peering w/ dulapbot btw. key & addr.
    
    phf: asciilifeform: is 9973 the previous stable version? i.e. whatever you guys were running for weeks before?
    
    asciilifeform:  asciilifeform's curr. at for phf
    
    asciilifeform: phf: 9973 is current 'stable' blatta
    
    asciilifeform: on dulapbot still running 9976
    
    phf: right
    
    asciilifeform: phf: btw try port 38144 for asciilifeform's station ( loox like from dulapbot's pov he's on an ephemeral? and fwd rule is borked ? )
    
    asciilifeform: web config (or otherwise outtaband) at would be quite handy
    
    asciilifeform: dulapbot ftr dun have nat issue, it is in the rack, so oughta work
    
    phf: asciilifeform: yeah, i'm going to try dulapbot instead but need to get to machine with keys. i don't think sending to your ephemeral port, without you also sending to my ephemeral port will work. because and since we're both behind nat, we have to warm up connection state tables
    
    asciilifeform: phf: appeared to work w/ PeterL on 9973 (where addrcast), whether worx depends on what kinda nat (typically ignores origin, but some do not)
    
    asciilifeform: we'll need this, eventually, asciilifeform suspects, for 'final solution to nat'
    
    dulapbot: (pest) 2022-09-07 asciilifeform: afaik with 'symmetric' nats of the type apparently victimizing jonsykkel , the only drill that worx is to hammer random ports, from both directions, until match
    
    asciilifeform must bbl
    
    asciilifeform: err, 9972 where addrcast
    
    asciilifeform genuinely bbl
    
    phf: asciilifeform: addrcast as far as i understand by design (it's your design!) uses intermediary to tell both stations what corresponding epthemeral ports are. so that station start broadcast (of e.g. garbage) and there's a few packets lost, before mutual state table relationship is established
    
    phf: so e.g. a, ip 1, port 1, b ip 2, port 1: a sends to b, now a's router knows that there's 1:1 - 2:1 connection, but this packet is rejected by b, until b ALSO sends something to a, and now b's router knows 2:1 - 1:1 connection. b's packet will go through, if it went after a's packet. and after b sent his packet, a will start recieving packets also
    
    phf: (aka hole punching technique, but i've explained it in a detail above, because people might forget or not know what hole punching actually entails)
    
    phf: you could probably just send the whole 65536 range, but i like the idea of sitting there, trying to hit random ports. sort of like digging an prison escape tunnel with a robotic spoon
    
    phf: blatta network is not being healthy. so i did a transmit through dulapbot, which appeared on logs.nsl about 2 minutes later, and it's been another 3 minutes and it's still not on bitdash
    
    phf: trying to send packets through awt, with updated AT and i'm not getting any reaciton
    
    asciilifeform: phf: loox like it got logged on bitdash in the end
    
    phf: yeah, 10 minutes later
    
    asciilifeform: phf: there's defo a bug w/ embargo logic in all blattas to date ( partly asciilifeform's fault, that section of spec is laughably incomplete )
    
    asciilifeform: phf: the random dig algo is not only aesthetically appealing but afaik actually faster, statistically, than any possible deterministic one
    
    phf: well, i'm getting packets from awt, but sending packets out seems to take Very Long Time™
    
    asciilifeform: phf: likely because he aint peered w/ dulapbot , and so it walks from the latter to asciilifeform then to him, and each time sits in the hearsay clink
    
    phf: i'm talking to him directly now
    
    asciilifeform: a and still slow?
    
    phf: yeah, i sent "test", got back message type 3, and it's been sitting couple of minutes now (shouldn't that buffer be 10s?)
    
    asciilifeform: ( iirc awt himself is on 9972, where errything dog slow, it gets into prod loops and devours the cpu , was wai asciilifeform rolled back )
    
    phf: but i sent him prod and got it back instantly
    
    asciilifeform: interesting
    
    phf: in fact prod followed by getdata got me back a packet at eval times
    
    phf: but my "test" packet's been  in flight for 5 minutes now
    
    phf: and it just landed
    
    asciilifeform: there iit went