1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <bip@mattwhitlock.name>) id 1WXYvT-0004IV-Nz
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:31:07 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from qmta13.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.59.243])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1WXYvS-0002Df-Lt for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:31:07 +0000
Received: from omta24.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.76])
by qmta13.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast
id nQ5u1n0031ei1Bg5DUX166; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:31:01 +0000
Received: from crushinator.localnet ([IPv6:2601:6:4800:47f:219:d1ff:fe75:dc2f])
by omta24.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast
id nUWz1n00l4VnV2P3kUX1c6; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:31:01 +0000
From: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 12:30:59 -0400
Message-ID: <3054815.493DgUE4ho@crushinator>
User-Agent: KMail/4.12.4 (Linux/3.12.13-gentoo; KDE/4.12.4; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CADZB0_bqzoCT7XRgaoWBZLyfoFjWvLs8-YaP9AZ=sv7x_xJbpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADZB0_bqzoCT7XRgaoWBZLyfoFjWvLs8-YaP9AZ=sv7x_xJbpQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [76.96.59.243 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1WXYvS-0002Df-Lt
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] have there been complains about network
congestion? (router crashes,
slow internet when running Bitcoin nodes)
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 16:31:07 -0000
On Tuesday, 8 April 2014, at 12:13 pm, Angel Leon wrote:
> I was wondering if we have or expect to have these issues in the futu=
re,
> perhaps uTP could help greatly the performance of the entire network =
at
> some point.
Or people could simply learn to configure their routers correctly. The =
only time I ever notice that Bitcoind is saturating my upstream link is=
when I try to transfer a file using SCP from a computer on my home net=
work to a computer out on the Internet somewhere. SCP sets the "maximiz=
e throughput" flag in the IP "type of service" field, and my router int=
erprets that as meaning low priority, and so those SCP transfers get st=
alled behind Bitcoind. But mostly everything else (e.g., email, web bro=
wsing, instant messaging, SSH) shows no degration whatsoever regardless=
of what Bitcoind is doing. The key is to move the packet queue from th=
e cable modem into the router, where intelligent decisions about packet=
priority and reordering can be enacted.
=B5TP pretty much reinvents the wheel, and it does so in userspace, whe=
re the overhead is greater. There's no need for it if proper QoS is in =
effect.
|
