Opened 8 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
#884 closed enhancement (fixed)
I2PSnark tunnels
Reported by: | DISABLED | Owned by: | zzz |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | minor | Milestone: | 0.9.6 |
Component: | apps/i2psnark | Version: | 0.9.4 |
Keywords: | Cc: | ||
Parent Tickets: | Sensitive: | no |
Description
as i see it, correlation between i2psnark torrents is possible by viewing the destination.. this is due to the same tunnels being used for each torrent.
i suggest that torrents be ran on different tunnels
this opens up Some possibilitey
1 torrents be earmarked as member of an "identity"
2 each torrent runs on independent tunnels
3 tick box to run on seperate tunnel
thank you this is important to me
Subtickets
Change History (6)
comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by
Status: | new → assigned |
---|---|
Type: | defect → enhancement |
comment:2 follow-up: 3 Changed 8 years ago by
Milestone: | 0.9.5 → 0.9.6 |
---|
right. The Robert client used to do this but it was too much overhead.
As of now, multiple i2psnark instances doesn't work, but it's been fixed in the Jetty 7 branch, this will be in the 0.9.6 or 0.9.7 release.
comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by
Replying to echelon:
Will not happen anywhere soon (the next 5 years). To much ressource consumption, to much work.
Use more than one I2Psnark client, use robert, use transmision or snarkXL.
i2psnark * 2 would use more java ram and still more bandwidth
only differnce is code time
Replying to zzz:
right. The Robert client used to do this but it was too much overhead.
As of now, multiple i2psnark instances doesn't work, but it's been fixed in the Jetty 7 branch, this will be in the 0.9.6 or 0.9.7 release.
ok, please consider implementing this functionality although. it would be appreciate by many.
comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by
Hi
considered and postponed after all other is solved, it may be just coding, but no one see it as needed as you. So, start coding!
From memory consumption: one torrent per destination consumes a LOT of memory and lots of CPU/network ressources, as has been proven by robert already.
From bandwidth point of view there is no difference, if one or more clients do use the same amount of destinations.
Using a 2nd snark is the best solution currently (or i2psnarkXL), the added memory is really not worth discussion about it or coding your wished feature.
comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by
Please elaborate on why this feature is important to you. What's the use case and attack scenario? How many torrents would you want to do this with? You want different groups of torrents on different tunnels, or one-per-tunnel?
comment:6 Changed 8 years ago by
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | assigned → closed |
Multiple snarks supported as of 0.9.5-1. Turned out to be a lot of work to get it right. Instructions at http://zzz.i2p/topics/1374 .
Multiple tunnels or groups within a single snark instance isn't going to happen. It was tried in Robert for quite a while and then discarded as too much of a resource hog.
I understand that it doesn't completely meet your request.. but closing ticket as it's fixed as much as it's going to be.
Will not happen anywhere soon (the next 5 years). To much ressource consumption, to much work.
Use more than one I2Psnark client, use robert, use transmision or snarkXL.