Selsta. Before you approve a major code commit, something with a lot of line changes or additions, do you run it through a static code analyzer first like cppcheck?

afaik that's the responsibility of reviewers

whether or not it passes CI is what matters most, static analyzers will only pick up some code smells otherwise

UkoeHB: CL is cryptic for what?

*CI

CI = continuous integration

Hi guys

A question about monerod. I linked it to other monerod nodes via i2pd. My goal is for monerod to work only on the i2p network without communication via clearnet. However, I can't figure out how to disable clearnet connectivity and leave only i2p. Monerod writes 200+ ip addresses.

What is the point of connecting via i2p/tor if there is no way to disable the clearnet?

The default is to send txes via tor, blocks via clearnet. Blocks are public, and you want them to propagate fast. Txes can be private, and do not need so much speed.

If you want everything to go via tor or i2p, use a gateway VM, that way you're sure.

A hack might be to enable ipv6, make sure your machine does not have an ipv6 stack, and disable ipv4. IIRC there's a switch for that.

But a gateway VM is safest. Saves you from possible bugs.

My task is so that the Internet provider does not know that I have montero. To do this, I need everything to pass through tor/i2p. In addition, so that DNS TXT does not reveal me. Your method is very complicated, how can you contact the development team to suggest that they add the variable "i2ponly = 1" or "toronly = 1" to named.conf.

I think a lot of people would like to have a monerod hidden from the provider

s/montero/monerod/, s/named/monerod/, s/./?/

<moneromoooo> "The default is to send txes..." <- Do I understand correctly that if moneron is connected via clearnet and i2p, then the transaction will be sent only to i2p nodes and through them further along the network?

* Do I understand correctly that if monerod is connected via clearnet and i2p, then the transaction will be sent only to i2p nodes and through them further along the network?

> <@soderzhanie:matrix.org> My task is so that the Internet provider does not know that I have monerod. To do this, I need everything to pass through tor/i2p. In addition, so that DNS TXT does not reveal me. Your method is very complicated, how can you contact the development team to suggest that they add the variable "i2ponly = 1" or "toronly = 1" to monerod.conf?

> I think a lot of people would like to have a monerod hidden from the provider

If anything, Tor traffic is way more suspicious than monerod

I don't use the tor at all, there are only malicious nodes there and it was easily banned in Russia. This means that he is good for nothing but attracting attention. That's why I'm focusing on i2p

> <@soderzhanie:matrix.org> My task is so that the Internet provider does not know that I have monerod. To do this, I need everything to pass through tor/i2p. In addition, so that DNS TXT does not reveal me. Your method is very complicated, how can you contact the development team to suggest that they add the variable "i2ponly = 1" or "toronly = 1" to monerod.conf?

> I think a lot of people would like to have a monerod hidden from the provider

Use DoH to hide DNS traffic

Also use monerod with SSL so it's HTTPS traffic

I know that you can configure dns, use vpn, and perform a bunch of other actions, but as for me, this is an attempt to revive the dead. It seems to me there is nothing more useful than integration with i2p for montero at the moment. This is really what will make the clients of the network and nodes anonymous in relation to each other. Especially now there are i2p clients in c++ that have significantly increased the speed (I visit

social networks through i2p)

s/montero/monero/

yeah i2pd works pretty well. I use both i2pd and tor

It seems to me that you can contact the PurpleI2Pd development team if you have any questions about how to integrate their product into monero by default. This will help both their networks and Montero's networks, and most importantly users. If not integrated, then at least create conditions for working in pairs. Or is the monero team afraid of serious steps in terms of anonymity?

s/Montero/Monero/

soderzhanie[m]: it’s work that someone has to do, not related to any agenda

You’re saying someone should do work

"at least create conditions for working in pairs" not sure what that means

we already include docs in the README for using with i2pd

 

I had once tried adding i2p to monerod

It didn't connect to any i2p node, only to ipv4

I know that monero can work with i2p. However, we are talking about working only through i2p, and not through clearnet+i2p

soderzhanie[m]: I think that to do that you need two devices, one running i2p daemon, and the other completely proxified using an i2p socks5 proxy and running monerod

but it's extremely easy to shoot yourself in the foot

I want blocks and transactions to go through i2p

but no other nodes are expecting to receive blocks thru i2p?

What do you mean? I have 10-20 connections with other nodes via i2p, what is the problem for me to exchange blocks with them?

卩尺ㄖ卩卄乇ㄒ: I also like i2p, and run/use a monerod via i2pd. Here is my preferred setup for monerod:... (full message at <libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/do…655459b03f117c9e5e508fed3aa77173d8b>)

Perhaps my setup can still be hardened by blocking incoming clearnet connections, and thus restricting everything to i2p only?

"incoming clearnet connections" = Tell monerod to not even try connecting clearnet nodes.

Monerod status

Out 260 in 0

This is clearnet

I want out 0 in 0 and connect via i2p

Yeah, I believe that means you have a similar setup to mine: your monerod receives txs from clearnet nodes but clearnet nodes do not connect to your node.

Maybe set in-peers=0 ?

jozsef[m]: Yes

jozsef[m]: No, I think you need `out-peers=0`? But wouldn't that isolate even from i2p? I'm not sure.

We need to try in out 0 0, test it, but I'm afraid that then the i2p nodes will turn off. I'll check and write

vtnerd: Do the out-peers and/or in-peers settings affect only clearnet connections if i2p is also configured or overall?

Only clearnet

Clearnet set to 24 and tor set to 36 = 24 clearnet peers and <12 tor peers

Disclaimer: answer is from personal experience / trial and error

Out peers 24

Anon inbound 36

Tx proxy 16

= never more than 24 clear peers and ive never seen more than 12 tor peers (=36 total)

Nice! Thanks for the empirics. So they are separately controlled.

Give me how write this is monerod.conf please

s/is/in/

Now set both in-peers and out-peers to 0 and leave it for a qhile and see if the height increases in a few minutes time.

s/qhile/while/

jozsef[m]: Ок

I'll write about result a few hours ago

It is a pity that monerod does not write information about the connection via i2p/tor

Traffic and sync_info

There is this page

and I also found this one useful

> <@jbakosi:matrix.org> There is this page... (full message at <libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/do…05afb54b37523ebea531c365a705e27af9f>)

`monerod status`

`monerod print_cn` <- this shows i2p connections

`monerod print_pl white` <- this also show i2p connections

Thanks

s///, s/ANONYMITY_NETWORKS/ANONYMITY\_NETWORKS/

#monero:monero.social and try to avoid edits

Yes, inout peer = 0

Then all connections via i2p

#monero:monero.social please

sech1: how important is it that p2pool receives a SIGINT/TERM instead of a SIGKILL?

SIGKILL can't be caught, so p2pool doesn't shut down properly

it shouldn't break anything though, maybe a few last log lines will be lost

<soderzhanie[m]> "Then all connections via i2p" <- Sheit... Height 2770180

> <@jbakosi:matrix.org> `monerod status`

> `monerod print_cn` <- this shows i2p connections

> `monerod print_pl white` <- this also show i2p connections

I do not receive blocks over i2p although there is a connection and some data is being transmitted

With inout peers 0

ofrnxmr: Maybe you know what's going on?

#monero:monero.social

This is the wrong room

I will not answer you here

ok nice, kill() is the method the stdlib has so i wasn't sure if it was worth making a bad workaround

sending exit\n into p2pool's stdin isn't... too bad though right?

I think sending exit\n into stdin won't work because p2pool uses tty for console input

i figured this out the hard way right now actually lol

i'll have to create a pty alongside p2pool i guess

jozef[m]: it definitely does affect it, iirc the number is per-zone

so 10-outpeers means 10 outpeers per zone (clearnet, i2p, or tor)