0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: abit on June 10, 2016, 08:45:15 amhttps://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2/commit/aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617I applied this one-liner change and it causes a compile error. I mentioned the error in the telegram channel.
https://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2/commit/aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617
In file included from /root/bitshares-2/libraries/fc/include/fc/log/logger.hpp:5:0, from /root/bitshares-2/libraries/fc/include/fc/exception/exception.hpp:6, from /root/bitshares-2/libraries/fc/include/fc/thread/future.hpp:5, from /root/bitshares-2/libraries/fc/include/fc/thread/task.hpp:2, from /root/bitshares-2/libraries/fc/include/fc/thread/thread.hpp:5, from /root/bitshares-2/libraries/net/node.cpp:61:/root/bitshares-2/libraries/net/node.cpp: In member function âvoid graphene::net::detail::node_impl::accept_loop()â:/root/bitshares-2/libraries/fc/include/fc/log/log_message.hpp:161:19: error: expected primary-expression before â(â token fc::log_message( FC_LOG_CONTEXT(LOG_LEVEL), FORMAT, fc::mutable_variant_object()__VA_ARGS__ )
} catch (...) {}
My witness node has missed a block every day (today it has already missed 2) since June 4th.
Shouldn't we build more nodes using the fund accumulated by "refund" worker?
the latter two should be removed.faucet.bitshares.org does not exist anylongerand openledger does not provide a public seed node.
Quote from: xeroc on June 09, 2016, 03:30:50 pmwe should get these out of the default seed node list for the next update ..Happy to remove 104.168.154.160:50696 from the default list as it not playing nice, my other seed node is solid.
we should get these out of the default seed node list for the next update ..
Quote from: cube on June 10, 2016, 03:22:35 amQuote from: abit on June 09, 2016, 06:01:39 pmQuote from: cube on June 09, 2016, 04:21:21 pmQuote from: wackou on June 09, 2016, 03:00:49 pmthere are quite a few seed nodes down or stuck again...@lafona @puppies @betax @liondani @cube @iHashFury @Harvey http://status.bitsharesnodes.com/@abit was working on a patch but it has a compile problem. Abit, have you fixed it?I thought I had replied earlier.. Code: [Select]git remote add abit https://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2.gitgit fetch abitgit checkout 2.0.160328git submodule update --init --recursivegit cherry-pick aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617cmake .makeI cannot find the commit aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617. Can you show me the direct link to aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617?https://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2/commit/aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617
Quote from: abit on June 09, 2016, 06:01:39 pmQuote from: cube on June 09, 2016, 04:21:21 pmQuote from: wackou on June 09, 2016, 03:00:49 pmthere are quite a few seed nodes down or stuck again...@lafona @puppies @betax @liondani @cube @iHashFury @Harvey http://status.bitsharesnodes.com/@abit was working on a patch but it has a compile problem. Abit, have you fixed it?I thought I had replied earlier.. Code: [Select]git remote add abit https://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2.gitgit fetch abitgit checkout 2.0.160328git submodule update --init --recursivegit cherry-pick aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617cmake .makeI cannot find the commit aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617. Can you show me the direct link to aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617?
Quote from: cube on June 09, 2016, 04:21:21 pmQuote from: wackou on June 09, 2016, 03:00:49 pmthere are quite a few seed nodes down or stuck again...@lafona @puppies @betax @liondani @cube @iHashFury @Harvey http://status.bitsharesnodes.com/@abit was working on a patch but it has a compile problem. Abit, have you fixed it?I thought I had replied earlier.. Code: [Select]git remote add abit https://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2.gitgit fetch abitgit checkout 2.0.160328git submodule update --init --recursivegit cherry-pick aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617cmake .make
Quote from: wackou on June 09, 2016, 03:00:49 pmthere are quite a few seed nodes down or stuck again...@lafona @puppies @betax @liondani @cube @iHashFury @Harvey http://status.bitsharesnodes.com/@abit was working on a patch but it has a compile problem. Abit, have you fixed it?
there are quite a few seed nodes down or stuck again...@lafona @puppies @betax @liondani @cube @iHashFury @Harvey http://status.bitsharesnodes.com/
git remote add abit https://github.com/abitmore/bitshares-2.gitgit fetch abitgit checkout 2.0.160328git submodule update --init --recursivegit cherry-pick aa844f56faac4dda0d542520a672c4704fb0e617cmake .make
Quote from: iHashFury on May 23, 2016, 11:27:48 amQuote from: pc on May 21, 2016, 01:23:27 pmQuote from: iHashFury on May 21, 2016, 08:56:46 amPlease add my primary seed node to your list.212.47.249.84:50696Hm... it should get added automatically, eventually. Provided that it is well-connected itself, and accepts connections.Strange - my node is up and has been for some time according to http://status.bitsharesnodes.com/Why is it strange? I ran all of my nodes on port 1779 for months and they always had between 40 and 60 connections each, despite them not being advertised. Now that they're running on port 1776 I get closer to 100 connections on each node. Apparently the nodes have a way of finding each other. Also, for whatever reason, all 4 of my nodes have not experienced the "stuck" state for a full week now.
Quote from: pc on May 21, 2016, 01:23:27 pmQuote from: iHashFury on May 21, 2016, 08:56:46 amPlease add my primary seed node to your list.212.47.249.84:50696Hm... it should get added automatically, eventually. Provided that it is well-connected itself, and accepts connections.Strange - my node is up and has been for some time according to http://status.bitsharesnodes.com/
Quote from: iHashFury on May 21, 2016, 08:56:46 amPlease add my primary seed node to your list.212.47.249.84:50696Hm... it should get added automatically, eventually. Provided that it is well-connected itself, and accepts connections.
Please add my primary seed node to your list.212.47.249.84:50696
Quote from: wackou on May 06, 2016, 05:37:30 pmA view of the status of all seed nodes can be seen here:http://seed.bitsharesnodes.com/network/bts/seednodesAs you can see, the situation is pretty dire, so let's make this a wake up call:QuoteSEED NODE OPERATORS, PLEASE FIX YOUR SEED NODES!!This is very useful. By the way my node got stuck again. Same situation: "accept_loop" is destroyed. However the latest incoming connection was successfully established, so it should not be the cause.Will add more logs and check next time.
A view of the status of all seed nodes can be seen here:http://seed.bitsharesnodes.com/network/bts/seednodesAs you can see, the situation is pretty dire, so let's make this a wake up call:QuoteSEED NODE OPERATORS, PLEASE FIX YOUR SEED NODES!!
SEED NODE OPERATORS, PLEASE FIX YOUR SEED NODES!!
Quote from: Thom on May 05, 2016, 07:28:50 pmHere is the first few lines in my config.ini file. I see no reason why it should use port 1779 instead of port 1776:Quote# Endpoint for P2P node to listen onp2p-endpoint = 0.0.0.0:1776# P2P nodes to connect to on startup (may specify multiple times)#seed-node = 45.55.6.216:1776#seed-node = 114.92.254.159:62015#seed-node = seed01.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed02.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed03.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed04.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed05.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed06.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed07.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = 188.165.233.53:1777#seed-node = 104.236.51.238:2005#seed-node = 114.92.254.159:62015As you can see the p2p-endpoint is defined to use 1776 and all of the seed definitions are built into the code, none are configured in the runtime config file. When I use netstat there are no listeners on 1776 but plenty on 1779, so the only conclusion I would be inclined to make is the definitions in the code must specify 1779 to override the p2p-endpoint defined in the config file.You're starting with bts_tools right? @wackou any idea?
Here is the first few lines in my config.ini file. I see no reason why it should use port 1779 instead of port 1776:Quote# Endpoint for P2P node to listen onp2p-endpoint = 0.0.0.0:1776# P2P nodes to connect to on startup (may specify multiple times)#seed-node = 45.55.6.216:1776#seed-node = 114.92.254.159:62015#seed-node = seed01.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed02.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed03.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed04.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed05.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed06.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed07.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = 188.165.233.53:1777#seed-node = 104.236.51.238:2005#seed-node = 114.92.254.159:62015As you can see the p2p-endpoint is defined to use 1776 and all of the seed definitions are built into the code, none are configured in the runtime config file. When I use netstat there are no listeners on 1776 but plenty on 1779, so the only conclusion I would be inclined to make is the definitions in the code must specify 1779 to override the p2p-endpoint defined in the config file.
# Endpoint for P2P node to listen onp2p-endpoint = 0.0.0.0:1776# P2P nodes to connect to on startup (may specify multiple times)#seed-node = 45.55.6.216:1776#seed-node = 114.92.254.159:62015#seed-node = seed01.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed02.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed03.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed04.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed05.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed06.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = seed07.bitsharesnodes.com:1776#seed-node = 188.165.233.53:1777#seed-node = 104.236.51.238:2005#seed-node = 114.92.254.159:62015
nodes: bts: p2p_port: 1776 ...
Maybe not, are these are 4 connections on 1776 or 1779:Code: [Select]# netstat | grep 1776tcp 0 0 seed05.bitsharesnodes:1779 81-89-101-133.blue:1776 ESTABLISHEDtcp 0 48 seed05.bitsharesnodes:1779 c-71-197-2-119.hsd:1776 ESTABLISHEDtcp 0 0 seed05.bitsharesnodes:1779 120.55.181.181:1776 ESTABLISHEDtcp 0 0 seed05.bitsharesnodes:1779 host-95-71-22-178.:1776 ESTABLISHED
# netstat | grep 1776tcp 0 0 seed05.bitsharesnodes:1779 81-89-101-133.blue:1776 ESTABLISHEDtcp 0 48 seed05.bitsharesnodes:1779 c-71-197-2-119.hsd:1776 ESTABLISHEDtcp 0 0 seed05.bitsharesnodes:1779 120.55.181.181:1776 ESTABLISHEDtcp 0 0 seed05.bitsharesnodes:1779 host-95-71-22-178.:1776 ESTABLISHED
//Update:I tried https://seed04.bitsharesnodes.com/info and found the p2p port is 1779. Is it supposed? If yes please submit a pull request to Github, like this: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-2/pull/14/filesAll your other seed nodes are listening on port 1779 as well.
How is it that the seeds can be restarted and regain 20 - 30 or more connections and yet fail the basic protocol test?I restarted 2 of my nodes and waited for them to regain sync. That process looked quite normal. As soon as they were synced I reran this test:Quote[ -n "`echo EOF | nc seed05.bitsharesnodes.com 1776 -w 10 -q 2`" ] && echo Ok || echo Failedand they still show failed.I'm guessing part of the answer to that lies in the protocol. If I use that script on the P2P port it responds with Ok. Hence the issue has to do with the port for "new" connections on 1776, right?As I said tho, restarting the nodes doesn't seem to affect that, the script still fails on port 1776 after the restart.
[ -n "`echo EOF | nc seed05.bitsharesnodes.com 1776 -w 10 -q 2`" ] && echo Ok || echo Failed
Ok, got it.I'm noticing the traffic is dropping off now. Probably won't be long before nodes loose sync and we're all notified by the telegram bot of missing blocks.The situation if getting urgent very quickly!
Fox has explained already.
If it is a successful attack, should I assume the same attack can accomplished to steem as well?
Quote from: Thom on May 04, 2016, 11:52:12 pmYeah, I get the same results.I don't understand the logic of that script, or perhaps I don't understand the protocol. Looks like you send EOF to a node with netcat and wait 2 seconds for a response then terminate the connection. The script will wait up to 10 seconds to establish the connection. If the witness doesn't return a string the script result is failed otherwise it's ok.Is EOF End of File or End of Frame? Either way the witness is supposed to respond to basically null data with an ack of some sort?As I said I get the same result as you, yet as you say the nodes are all talking. Sorry if this sounds negative, but this is pretty much what frustrates me about how the devs in this community communicate. It's just too terse and abbreviated and I struggle to follow as a result. I think it's safe to say if transactions weren't being processed the indication would be more obvious. You clearly have deeper knowledge of BitShares internals than I do, but I'm afraid you'll have to provide a few more details before I'll understand what the issue is. As for monitoring my nodes I am using wackou's bts_tools which is far more comprehensive at monitoring the nodes than I've seen from other sources. Not saying it's the best at it, there may be other tools which are better but I haven't seen them described or documented as well as bts_tools. The tools could use some refinement, but no code is perfect.If you want me to do other tests or want me to check anything just let me know and I'll do my best to help you out.Sorry I have no time to explain. Perhaps I'll get @wackou to talk with you, seems you trust him more. Best if @bytemaster has written a white paper for the protocol, but right now all info is in the code.
Yeah, I get the same results.I don't understand the logic of that script, or perhaps I don't understand the protocol. Looks like you send EOF to a node with netcat and wait 2 seconds for a response then terminate the connection. The script will wait up to 10 seconds to establish the connection. If the witness doesn't return a string the script result is failed otherwise it's ok.Is EOF End of File or End of Frame? Either way the witness is supposed to respond to basically null data with an ack of some sort?As I said I get the same result as you, yet as you say the nodes are all talking. Sorry if this sounds negative, but this is pretty much what frustrates me about how the devs in this community communicate. It's just too terse and abbreviated and I struggle to follow as a result. I think it's safe to say if transactions weren't being processed the indication would be more obvious. You clearly have deeper knowledge of BitShares internals than I do, but I'm afraid you'll have to provide a few more details before I'll understand what the issue is. As for monitoring my nodes I am using wackou's bts_tools which is far more comprehensive at monitoring the nodes than I've seen from other sources. Not saying it's the best at it, there may be other tools which are better but I haven't seen them described or documented as well as bts_tools. The tools could use some refinement, but no code is perfect.If you want me to do other tests or want me to check anything just let me know and I'll do my best to help you out.
[...] I think it's safe to say if transactions weren't being processed the indication would be more obvious.
83.221.132.47:1776Failed188.40.91.213:1776Failed114.92.236.175:62015Failed71.197.2.119:1776Ok45.32.247.234:1776Failed82.211.31.175:1776Failed159.203.15.153:1776Failed188.166.188.206:1776Failed107.170.245.89:1777Ok54.85.252.77:39705Failed104.236.144.84:1777Failed40.127.190.171:1777Failed185.25.22.21:1776Failed23.95.43.126:50696Failed109.73.172.144:50696Failed128.199.143.47:2015Failed
2016-05-05T06:45:19 p2p:accept_loop accept_loop ] accepted inbound connection from 211.149.148.148:58502 node.cpp:41782016-05-05T06:45:19 p2p:accept_connection_task scope_logger ] entering peer_connection::accept_connection() peer_connection.cpp:1902016-05-05T06:45:19 p2p:accept_connection_task accept_connection ] error accepting connection 11 eof_exception: End Of FileEnd of file {"message":"End of file"} asio asio.cpp:36 operator() peer_connection.cpp:2172016-05-05T06:45:19 p2p:accept_connection_task ~scope_logger ] leaving peer_connection::accept_connection() peer_connection.cpp:191
p2p.log.20160505T060000:2016-05-05T06:46:00 p2p:accept_loop destroy ] calling close_connection() peer_connection.cpp:127p2p.log.20160505T060000:2016-05-05T06:46:00 p2p:accept_loop destroy ] close_connection completed normally peer_connection.cpp:129p2p.log.20160505T060000:2016-05-05T06:46:00 p2p:accept_loop destroy ] canceling _send_queued_messages task peer_connection.cpp:142p2p.log.20160505T060000:2016-05-05T06:46:00 p2p:accept_loop destroy ] cancel_and_wait completed normally peer_connection.cpp:144p2p.log.20160505T060000:2016-05-05T06:46:00 p2p:accept_loop destroy ] canceling accept_or_connect_task peer_connection.cpp:157p2p.log.20160505T060000:2016-05-05T06:46:00 p2p:accept_loop destroy ] accept_or_connect_task completed normally peer_connection.cpp:159
Are we talking BitShares or STEEM? The OP says BitShares, but your last post looks like STEEM. Don't you guys have a separate channel for STEEM witnesses, and why post here on BitShares General Discussion? For those witnesses like myself who aren't engaged as a STEEM witness (I find ramping up on STEEM project too frustrating, knowledge limited and scattered, making it hard to follow), please be clear so as not to give us false alerts. According to my tools bitshares seeds (at least the 4 I run) have not shown any issues in the last 24 hours.Thanks.
$ [ -n "`echo EOF | nc seed04.bitsharesnodes.com 1776 -w 10 -q 2`" ] && echo Ok || echo FailedFailed
[ -n "`echo EOF | nc steem.clawmap.com 2001 -w 10 -q 2`" ] && echo Ok || echo Failed
1535394ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 83.221.132.47:17761541939ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 188.40.91.213:17761541939ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 114.92.236.175:620151556942ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 71.197.2.119:17761561942ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 45.32.247.234:17761567965ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 82.211.31.175:17761571306ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 159.203.15.153:17761572544ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 188.166.188.206:17761573421ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 107.170.245.89:17771573421ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 54.85.252.77:397051573421ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 104.236.144.84:17771573421ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 40.127.190.171:17771573421ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 185.25.22.21:17761573422ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 23.95.43.126:506961573422ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 109.73.172.144:506961573422ms th_a application.cpp:177 reset_p2p_node ] Adding seed node 128.199.143.47:2015
~$ telnet 83.221.132.47 1776Trying 83.221.132.47...^C~$ telnet 188.40.91.213 1776Trying 188.40.91.213...telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused~$ telnet 71.197.2.119 1776Trying 71.197.2.119...telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused~$ telnet 45.32.247.234 1776Trying 45.32.247.234...telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused~$ telnet 82.211.31.175 1776Trying 82.211.31.175...telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused~$ telnet 159.203.15.153 1776Trying 159.203.15.153...telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused~$ telnet 188.166.188.206 1776Trying 188.166.188.206...telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused~$ telnet 107.170.245.89 1777Trying 107.170.245.89...Connected to 107.170.245.89.Escape character is '^]'.^]telnet> quitConnection closed.~$ telnet 54.85.252.77 39705Trying 54.85.252.77...^C~$ telnet 104.236.144.84 1777Trying 104.236.144.84...^C~$ telnet 40.127.190.171 1777Trying 40.127.190.171...^C~$ telnet 185.25.22.21 1776Trying 185.25.22.21...^C~$ telnet 23.95.43.126 50696Trying 23.95.43.126...^C~$ telnet 109.73.172.144 50696Trying 109.73.172.144...^C~$ telnet 128.199.143.47 2015Trying 128.199.143.47...telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused
~$ telnet 114.92.236.175 62015Trying 114.92.236.175...Connected to 114.92.236.175.Escape character is '^]'.]▒▒a▒X ▒o▒▒▒g▒▒s▒a▒Z▒f▒^]