vtnerd opened pull request #8996: Add SSL support to P2P

> monero-project/monero #8996

<1​23bob123:matrix.org> I assume this wouldnt be full verify as there is no CA?

sech1: same question but hopefully less noise in here :)

It's better to use github.com/hinto-janai/monero-vanity - it's faster on CPU than my code on GPU thanks to better algorithm

sech1: that's just evidence to me that via sycl more performance could be achieved >:)

No - sycl, opencl, cuda are just compilers. Performance is all about better algorithm.

sech1: meaning, u could implement the better algorithm on sycl :')

not that using existing algorithm on cuda/sycl would be better

noticing that my node is connecting to its own I2P address, possibly related to 8918 because I didn't specify a port in my config but the "self" I'm connecting to has :18080 appended at the end

<v​tnerd:monero.social> Dan r/dark (Is not the man & Braxman Tomsparks Advocate ): there is verification via CLI - you can specify an IP and fingerprint. There is also limited verification after first use, of the remote peer opts into persistent certificates

<v​tnerd:monero.social> *if the peer

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Lyza monero-project/monero #8918

yep that's the one I mentioned. the last comment is mine

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Yeah, its the same bug

👍

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> If you changr your port in your config, youll rebroadcast a new port and add yet another valid entry to the peerlist

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Then this `Im not sure what conditions must be met, but in certain circumstances it will broadcast 18080 as the port. ` is your issue

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> All stem from broadcasting ports

yeah I'm not sure what causes 18080 to be appended either since there are entries with no port in my peer list

I believe some changes were made to the logic with this PR monero-project/monero #7017

it says self connect can be caused by a "misconfiguration" due to this PR but doesn't really elaborate on what proper configuration looks like. I guess we are "supposed" to specify a port? but it doesn't seem ideal to just let the "misconfiguration" silently persist

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> If we supply a port, changing it doesnt invalidate the old entry, so its still broken

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> I2p doesnt seem to care about ports. Bitcoin fix was to simply force port 0

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> bitcoin/bitcoin #21389

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> bitcoin/bitcoin #22112

wouldn't we want to avoid connecting to the same address at different ports anyway? I mean even for i2p or tor where ports are supported

ideally outgoing connections should each be to *independent* nodes

even for ip4*

"changing it doesnt invalidate the old entry," <--- so you're saying there was probably also an entry for my i2p address that has null port, and I still might self connect to that one if I change my config to 18080

anyway I agree forcing i2p address to null port or port 0 makes the most sense

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> And if you change it to 18085, youll have 3 valid peers

right I get that, I thought maybe 18080 was always getting appended to the null port address wouldn't be in peer lists

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Example: node.i2p.b32:18085/get_info

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> vs node.i2p.b32/get_info

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> vs node.i2p.b32:18080/get_info

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> will all return the same result.

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> i think 18080 might be getting appended automatically if no port is broadcast

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Which causes 2 entries to be broadcast. The one with no port, and the one with 18080. Im not sure, as i didnt take the time to reproduce it. All i know is i _never_ manually configured mine for 18080, yet it is there on peerlist as a valid peer (and ive connected to myself)

well for now I have configured mine to 18080 and am waiting to see if I self connect to the 'no port' entry at some point

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> The other problem with broadcasting 18080.. cosmetic - is its technically incorrect. a "dummy port" but the wrong dummy port. 18080 is for full p2p, and i2p anon inbound cant bind to 18080 if p2p already is

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> So i still believe this to be ideal

so I'm checking my peer list with `print pl` and I see entries like ".b32.i2p:0" ".b32.i2p:18080:0"

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> also because sync_info and peerlists are ugly, with some nodes having :0, some having no port, some with 18080 and then a plethora of custom ports

it seems like a :0 is getting appended without removing the port given in the config

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Grep it for sel or s3l

ok? looks similar to other entries

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> When i last checked, i found multiple "duplicates"

yes, most entries have duplicates

jesus I'

I've got i2p entries in my peer list back from when i2p still used peer_IDs

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> 😅

gray peers should like, eventually be purged I feel like

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Are there old onions too?

node was never configured for tor

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Ok

<m​urksombra:matrix.org> the research meeting happens on this channel, correct?

<m​urksombra:matrix.org> oh, wrong channel. My bad

i want to use monero as the main currency for my online business attempts, and i would like to automate as much as possible. Do i have to use the GUI merchant mode or can i use the CLI wallet to automate creation of reception addresses (and an external tool for QR codes) ?

sorry, wrong channel