Show Idle (>14 d.) Chans
← 2022-01-03 | 2022-01-05 → ↓
shinohai[billymg]: runniing 9983
shinohai[billymg]: ^ nope still dunwork
shinohai[billymg]: bot won't connect to smalpest in c AT ALL so I mite retire this bot
asciilifeform[billymg]: seems like a bug in smalpest, neh, not in bot
asciilifeform[billymg]: per spec pestron oughta be 100% irc-compat on the console end
asciilifeform[billymg]: no reason to retire the bot, shinohai , pestrons oughta be irc-compat.
asciilifeform[billymg]: iirc billymg's bot (based on asciilifeform's orig logotron) worx w/out modification
shinohai[billymg]: more experiments needed with smalpest, ditto with blatta perhaps there is a knob i should enable.
asciilifeform[billymg]: shinohai: iirc it worked w/ blatta, neh
awt[billymg]: asciilifeform: I'm in the shitty position of being in the middle of a large change so it's kind of difficult for me to go and make a patch for the last released version. I'm working on implementing a migration that will allow me to do an intermediary release that I can fix minor bugs on.
awt[billymg]: Alternatively I could release what I have and everyone could just rebuild their wot.
awt[billymg]: personally I'd rather put a little effort into building a migration mechanism
shinohai[billymg]: that is sound, certainly no rush
asciilifeform[billymg]: awt: currently puzzling re what happened to my peering w/ shinohai
asciilifeform[billymg]: ( and oh hm anuther self-echo. 3rd one today.. )
asciilifeform[billymg]: awt: it seems to function, but his msgs get displayed as hearsays erry time
bitbot: Logged on 2021-12-28 23:53:29 signpost[billymg]: tries haxing in a check for None in is_duplicate
bitbot: Logged on 2021-12-28 23:53:29 signpost[billymg]: tries haxing in a check for None in is_duplicate
awt[billymg]: does it perhaps apply re: shinohai?
asciilifeform[billymg] not tried the adhoc patch
asciilifeform[billymg]: (or is it in 9985 currently?)
awt[billymg]: 9983 is the latest available patch. no one released a patch for what signpost tried.
awt[billymg]: it is definitely a bug though
shinohai[billymg]: I have 9983 running here so far very good
asciilifeform[billymg]: hm where is 9983 posted?
asciilifeform[billymg]: the most recent vpatch on awt's www appears to be 9985
asciilifeform[billymg]: and oh hm asciilifeform turns out was wrong, in fact running 9983
asciilifeform[billymg] still recovering from covidiocy evidently
asciilifeform[billymg] checked own local press, indeed 9983
whaack[billymg]: asciilifeform: can you smell?
asciilifeform[billymg]: whaack: a little
asciilifeform[billymg]: (coupla wks ago entirely nope)
whaack[billymg]: yeah i was impressed at how much it wipes the smell hearing stories from others with it
whaack[billymg]: asciilifeform: i *think* i added you as a peer, but perhaps i have some operator error as i just used the commands as my intuition guided me to, i'm taking the time to read the spec now
asciilifeform[billymg]: whaack: keep in mind that the current blatta doesn't support the '%' command prefixes yet
asciilifeform[billymg]: (if yer in e.g. 'weechat', gotta do the /quote peer foo etc thing)
asciilifeform[billymg]: and oh hey there you are whaack , in asciilifeform's AT
asciilifeform[billymg]: makes for 7 direct peers for asciilifeform nao
asciilifeform[billymg]: of the 19 folx (not cntng. bots) currently in #a... notbad
whaack[billymg]: asciilifeform: nice!
whaack[billymg]: it looks like no one was able to peer with me with the information i sent to them
asciilifeform[billymg]: whaack: are you under nat ?
whaack[billymg]: billymg, shinohai, awt: did you guys add the peer info i gpg'd you? perhaps i err'd somewhere
asciilifeform[billymg]: (if yer under nat, will need to get the ~other~ fella's addr:port. supposing he aint)
whaack[billymg]: asciilifeform: i'm not sure, but idts, how would i go about checking?
asciilifeform[billymg]: whaack: if yer connecting from a residential line rather than one at a dc, chances are solid that you're under nat
asciilifeform[billymg]: (in which case you can do as described above, or do as asciilifeform did and set up a forwarding rule in yer router, similar to what's done for e.g. bittorrent)
whaack[billymg]: i'm connecting from a dc
asciilifeform[billymg]: then oughta work
asciilifeform[billymg]: possibly errybody else bungled it
asciilifeform[billymg]: atm blatta doesn't do 'addrcast', so if ~2~ peers simult. change ip or ports, they will lose one another
asciilifeform[billymg]: (station sends a broadcast msg containing a ciphergram to $peer, to ea. peer, with its current reachable ip/port)
asciilifeform[billymg]: then for so long as you can reach anyone in yer pestnet, and you have keys established, will automatically link up with said peers.
asciilifeform[billymg]: addrcast goes to all peers on yer net (it's a broadcast) but is only readable by the addressee.
asciilifeform[billymg]: (the rest have nfi who it's addressed to)
whaack[billymg]: i realize i err'd also by sending everyone the same key, certainly that was improper
asciilifeform[billymg]: not only unhygienic but won't work at all
asciilifeform[billymg]: duplicate keys aint permitted in the db, given as the key is how a station even distinguishes originators of packets
asciilifeform[billymg]: (the source ip aint used for this)
whaack[billymg]: that's probably the problem then
asciilifeform[billymg|billymg]: that'd explain why whaack was only able to peer w/ asciilifeform
whaack[billymg]: and signpost, since he sent me a key
asciilifeform[billymg]: see also spec, where 'KEY HANDLE KEY Add a KEY for the peer identified by HANDLE. KEY is in all cases a base64-encoded 512-byte value, and may not previously exist anywhere in the WOT. If HANDLE is unknown, a warning is displayed.'
asciilifeform[billymg]: procedure for adding a peer 'foo' is 1) /peer foo 2) /key foo KEYSTRING where KEYSTRING is one you made for him via GENKEY, or one he made for you via same (and in either direction pgpgram'd)
asciilifeform[billymg]: (we dun have autorekeying yet, afaik, except possibly in 'smalpest')
asciilifeform[billymg]: note that you can have >1 key per peer if want
asciilifeform[billymg]: (i've nfi whether tested w/ blatta or smalpest)
asciilifeform[billymg]: whaack: here is how a pest station determines originator of a packet.
asciilifeform[billymg]: whaack: lemme know if makes sense to you when you get a chance to read.
asciilifeform[billymg] defo looking to make spec max. edible.
bitbot: Logged on 2022-01-04 21:45:28 asciilifeform[billymg|billymg]: that'd explain why whaack was only able to peer w/ asciilifeform
awt[billymg]: hm yeah might only be checking that keys are unique per peer
awt[billymg]: also fwiw probably only checking the first key for a peer
asciilifeform[billymg]: per spec a peer can have as many keys as operator wants; the most recently validated one is used by default for transmission
asciilifeform[billymg]: ( and when rekeying, that's the one that gets rekeyed , but iirc we aint there yet )
asciilifeform[billymg] thinking, possibly oughta change spec there, use ~randomly selected~ key when there are multiples
jonsykkel[billymg]: http://logs.bitdash.io/pest/2022-01-04#1001584 << which bot is this? sourc avialbable? so i can fix if is problem with my pestron
bitbot: Logged on 2022-01-04 17:33:23 shinohai[billymg]: bot won't connect to smalpest in c AT ALL so I mite retire this bot
asciilifeform[billymg]: jonsykkel: not sure whether shinohai posted the src to his bot
asciilifeform[billymg]: it's the 1 that spits exch rate etc
jonsykkel[billymg]: i see. only tested irc connection from irssi and weechat so far
asciilifeform[billymg]: it worked fine on fleanode and currently working on dulapnet; would hate to see it vanish, if its incompat. w/ a pestron, it's the latter that's buggy
jonsykkel[billymg]: probably. my "ircd" is 100lines or so. maybe something is missing
asciilifeform[billymg]: could be; not tried it w/ mine yet
asciilifeform[billymg]: iirc billymg did not need major mods to make his go
asciilifeform[billymg]: ( iirc his bot is a largely unmodified clone of mine )
jonsykkel[billymg]: would help to see src to find out wats going on either way
jonsykkel[billymg]: asciilifeform: peered
asciilifeform[billymg]: that was quick
jonsykkel[billymg]: fastest peerer in the west
jonsykkel[billymg]: getting msgs directly from u now
asciilifeform[billymg]: record, to date
jonsykkel[billymg]: gotta set up leaderboard
jonsykkel[billymg]: also re: this - it does autorekey. and >1key tested also
bitbot: Logged on 2022-01-04 21:48:26 asciilifeform[billymg]: (we dun have autorekeying yet, afaik, except possibly in 'smalpest')
asciilifeform[billymg]: jonsykkel: oh neato
signpost[billymg]: http://logs.bitdash.io/pest/2022-01-04#1001606 << I'll cut ya a patch if you want, but figured it was a one liner and best rolled into your next batch of changes.
bitbot: Logged on 2022-01-04 19:08:59 awt[billymg]: 9983 is the latest available patch. no one released a patch for what signpost tried.
signpost[billymg]: but happy to if you like.
signpost[billymg] a little slow atm, house still on the mend, but getting better.
signpost[billymg]: I have ftr had flus that were 10x this.
whaack[billymg]: awt: perhaps there should be a notice that gives an error for when you try to direct message someone you don't have a key for, just tried to dm you to confirm it would not work (since we are not peered) and had to check logs to see that indeed my msg to you failed.
signpost[billymg]: whaack: do we need to roll keys on our peering?
whaack[billymg]: signpost: i understand your question as "should we make a new key pair (because *i* sent out the same key to multiple people) and if that is the correct understanding of your q the answer is no, since i used the key you gpg'd to me.
signpost[billymg]: ah right, sorry, groggy yet.
whaack[billymg]: also awt ^ the msg 'awt: perhaps there should be..." passed my dupe filter, i sent the msg, and then saw my own msg along with a relay from signpost
signpost[billymg]: whaack: yeah, I saw a dupe of that message from asciilifeform.
whaack[billymg]: i'm going to send the same msg again to see if it somehow the problem is specific to the text, ignore the next line:
whaack[billymg]: awt: perhaps there should be a notice that gives an error for when you try to direct message someone you don't have a key for, just tried to dm you to confirm it would not work (since we are not peered) and had to check logs to see that indeed my msg to you failed.
whaack[billymg]: ^ nope, this time the same msg had no dupes
signpost[billymg]: iirc awt said he had some bug which sometimes mutates messages such that they evade the dedup cache.
awt[billymg]: If anyone happens to spot the issue in the code I would welcome a patch
awt[billymg]: these dupes are annoying as hell
asciilifeform[billymg]: http://logs.bitdash.io/pest/2022-01-05#1001700 << asciilifeform's latest bout doesn't stand up to any comparison with flu. was much moar subtle, low-level annoyance, but protracted, 2wk long fever haze
bitbot: Logged on 2022-01-05 03:09:11 signpost[billymg]: I have ftr had flus that were 10x this.
bitbot: Logged on 2022-01-05 03:13:02 whaack[billymg]: awt: perhaps there should be a notice that gives an error for when you try to direct message someone you don't have a key for, just tried to dm you to confirm it would not work (since we are not peered) and had to check logs to see that indeed my msg to you failed.
asciilifeform[billymg]: http://logs.bitdash.io/pest/2022-01-05#1001703 << pestron ought have balked when you tried to make a 2nd peer w/ key seen prior
bitbot: Logged on 2022-01-05 03:15:42 whaack[billymg]: signpost: i understand your question as "should we make a new key pair (because *i* sent out the same key to multiple people) and if that is the correct understanding of your q the answer is no, since i used the key you gpg'd to me.
asciilifeform[billymg]: (i.e. is buggy if it dun do this)
asciilifeform[billymg]: http://logs.bitdash.io/pest/2022-01-05#1001710 << there's defo a bug atm which foils deduping, aha
bitbot: Logged on 2022-01-05 03:20:28 signpost[billymg]: iirc awt said he had some bug which sometimes mutates messages such that they evade the dedup cache.
asciilifeform[billymg] not had chance to hunt for it just yet
whaack[billymg]: i'm hunting down the bug, as a way to familiarize myself with the code as well
asciilifeform[billymg]: possibly a lead, is the fact that iirc all the dupes i've seen on the current blatta were 'from self'
asciilifeform[billymg]: (e.g. asciilifeform[awt]: foo)
asciilifeform[billymg]: btw eggogs of the type where e.g. sent to a keyless peer prolly oughta emit 'wallops' so to be visible in whatever pane of irctron
asciilifeform[billymg] puts this on list of what oughta go in spec
asciilifeform[billymg]: in 'modal' irctrons, e.g. 'weechat', the usual kind tends to go unnoticed
asciilifeform[billymg] currently pesting via 'weechat', tho for fleanode/dulapnet normally uses xchat
asciilifeform[billymg]: (xchat is ill-behaved when multiple servers)
jonsykkel[billymg]: ftr had another issue peering with blatta cuz dedup check happens after message is logged (infosec.py line238 and line258)
jonsykkel[billymg]: dunno if related to bug discussed
jonsykkel[billymg]: (bouncebakd messages from self got logged twice in db and caused problems)
whaack[billymg]: i can see in my db log that the first mesage has a half byte (nibble) that gets set to a 0 in the following messages, which is why i imagine that the dupe is not detected
whaack[billymg]: the original mesage had an odd number of nibbles, i.e. oddlength hexstring for bytes, so atm looks life self messages are erroneously corrupt for some reason with this half-byte suffix, and the relays correct this, which then results in a duplicate
← 2022-01-03 | 2022-01-05 → ↑
Random(pest) | Download hourly DB snapshot | Get Source Code