# Pastebin UqEpxgYe
(2:00:02 PM) anonimal: This will be a kovri meeting, everyone.
(2:00:27 PM) rehrar: as opposed to a...krispy kreme meeting?
(2:00:40 PM) serhack: Hi!
(2:00:54 PM) sgp_: hello!
(2:00:54 PM) oneiric_: hithere
(2:01:02 PM) hyc: hey
(2:01:07 PM) jtgrassie: hola
(2:01:08 PM) kovri-slack: <sean> Hi
(2:01:18 PM) zlatinb: hi
(2:01:27 PM) sarang: Hi
(2:01:32 PM) ErCiccione: Hi
(2:01:34 PM) anonimal: Any monero'ers interested in discussing my FFS or anything Sekreta related should setup a time to speak with me personally. Don't use a kovri meeting for that.
(2:01:58 PM) anonimal: All yours, ErCiccione
(2:02:24 PM) ErCiccione: Welcome everybody. I called this meeting because i think we really need to clarify what is the state of Kovri and make plans for the future. There is a lot of confusion in the air and i hope this meeting will bring some light.
(2:02:39 PM) ErCiccione: First of all. This subject is a sensitive one, we all know that, so let's keep the conversation respectful and avoid personal attacks. We are here to resolve a situation, not to amplify the drama.
(2:02:54 PM) ErCiccione: I invite you all to take a look at the meta issue that sgp_ opened about this meeting, it's a good summary of the situation: https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/300.
(2:03:14 PM) anonimal: This is a kovri project meeting, not a monero project meeting.
(2:03:25 PM) anonimal: If monero wants to discuss kovri, use a monero channel.
(2:03:39 PM) jtgrassie: There is cross-over though
(2:04:02 PM) ErCiccione: The meeting is related to the future of Kovri, i think it's necessary to also keep monero in consideration here
(2:04:21 PM) oneiric_: sean: would you mind sharing your paste?
(2:05:16 PM) ErCiccione: So, let's get to it. I would like to have clarified the relationship between Monero and Kovri at this point, because anonimal's opinion is that only the contributors who funded his proposal have voice about his FFS (which included Kovri to be plugged into Monero), so i think we need a clarification from the Core team here. What's the procedure in this case? because Smooth's opinion is clear: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/acgr0q/anominal_s
(2:05:16 PM) ErCiccione: tatement_on_secreta_and_kovri/ed9xc4q/
(2:05:38 PM) anonimal: It's not my opinion, it's fact.
(2:05:46 PM) ErCiccione: I think that's a step you need to make before getting into Kovri itseld
(2:05:51 PM) ErCiccione: *itself
(2:05:58 PM) rehrar: not necessarily
(2:06:01 PM) sgp_: anonimal: smooth clearly stated that the Core Team decides, not the donors, though we can still talk about it
(2:06:06 PM) rehrar: I think people have a misunderstanding how the FFS works.
(2:06:16 PM) anonimal: So much for escrow.
(2:06:16 PM) oneiric_: the efff
(2:06:17 PM) rehrar: The donors entrust the money to the Core team to steward. Dispersal is up to the core team.
(2:06:41 PM) rehrar: at least as far as I can gauge the sentiment judging by statements from smooth, pony, and others
(2:06:45 PM) anonimal: Under which law?
(2:06:45 PM) oneiric_: another meeting please
(2:06:49 PM) anonimal: Yes, seriously
(2:07:03 PM) rehrar: I also agree this is a topic for another meeting
(2:07:13 PM) rehrar: ErCiccione: we can assume (currently) no relationship between Kovri and Moenro
(2:07:15 PM) rehrar: for the sake of this meeting
(2:07:22 PM) sgp_: Yes, I explicitly redacted all FFS comments from the meeting issue as per oneiric_'s request
(2:07:23 PM) rehrar: on those terms we can keep it strictly techincal about Kovri
(2:07:49 PM) ErCiccione: Fair enough for me rehrar. we cna just go directly to Kovri
(2:08:01 PM) oneiric_: thanks again, we can totally have another meeting to discuss the FFS. just not this one
(2:08:13 PM) kovri-slack: <sean> Agreed, oneiric_
(2:08:22 PM) ArticMine: Hi sorry I am late
(2:08:42 PM) anonimal: I'm absolutely disgusted at the lot of moneroers who have literally spent more time rubbing their hands together, weaseling over the distribution of funds over actually helping kovri project.
(2:08:56 PM) ErCiccione: So, there are many ideas about how to improve and manage Kovri, I think oneiric_ and endogenic had some ideas about it
(2:09:16 PM) anonimal: Even more important, read the statement. No one said I wasn't going to do work nor complete the proposal as planned.
(2:09:41 PM) kovri-slack: <sean> I believe that the questions for this meeting, specifically for Kovri, are 1) what is the current state of Kovri development, 2) what work is necessary to complete a fully functioning version as-is, and 3) what alternative paths/reworks/restarts could we offer as an alternative?
(2:09:53 PM) rehrar: ^
(2:09:58 PM) sgp_: Yes sean, agreed :)
(2:10:05 PM) ErCiccione: agreed sean
(2:10:23 PM) rehrar: if we follow that rough agenda, I'd like to hear from the current contributors (who can code) the answer to 1
(2:10:36 PM) ErCiccione: Anonimal do you want to clarify point 1? before we talk about oneiric_'s ideas?
(2:10:37 PM) needmoney90 [sid289137@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-zdruthyxfjkkpnnh] entered the room.
(2:10:51 PM) rehrar: At the bottom of the git issue, MoroccanMalinois has made his opinion known (albeit in relation to Monero)
(2:11:00 PM) rehrar: but it does speak somewhat for the sake of Kovri as a whole right now
(2:11:21 PM) rehrar: https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/300#issuecomment-456056245
(2:11:24 PM) sgp_: MoroccanMallinois's opinion fron
(2:11:27 PM) anonimal: The current state is I gave sean repo access about 1.5 months ago to merge PRs while I worked on actual solutions for monero. Whether he had the time to merge, I don't know.
(2:11:36 PM) sgp_: apologies ^
(2:12:30 PM) anonimal: I've been awaiting the response from my donors, now I'm here.
(2:12:34 PM) sgp_: MoroccanMallinois believes that i2pd is generally in a more polished state. I would like to hear if other Kovri contributors feel the same way about the current state of Kovri
(2:13:38 PM) anonimal: i2pd had several "releases" before it was even forked. It had many 0days. MoroccanMalinois is not an authority on anonymity development.
(2:13:52 PM) anonimal: Why are you people so obsessed with i2p?
(2:14:06 PM) anonimal: I know I'm ahead of the curve with certain things in life, not everything, but god damn.
(2:14:14 PM) rehrar: anonimal: this is a kovri meeting, no? And kovri is a bare bones router implementatino of i2p in C++
(2:14:23 PM) rehrar: which is why we're discussing i2p stuff rn
(2:14:30 PM) anonimal: No, we're discussing monero integration
(2:14:31 PM) jtgrassie: Probably because Kovri is supposed to be an i2p implmentation
(2:14:31 PM) sgp_: We're just using it to help gauge the relative completeness of Kovri anonimal
(2:14:36 PM) MoroccanMalinois: lol no need to be an authority ...
(2:14:54 PM) anonimal: Because La Justina and her merry band of redditards believe is an opinion, so now we're talking about monero.
(2:15:01 PM) endogenic: perhaps we should avoid arguments from authority and speak based on matters
(2:15:06 PM) rehrar: ok, then let me clarify this meeting one more time.
(2:15:18 PM) anonimal: MoroccanMalinois: actually, yes. Try going to a doctor who doesn't have a license, see how that works out.
(2:15:20 PM) rehrar: We are not talking about Monero anything. We are expanding to Kovri's state, and whether we would trust it in integration with anything
(2:15:48 PM) anonimal: That sounds like a dev meeting concern
(2:15:55 PM) rehrar: would Kovri be trusted to integrate into an app (which yes, includes trusting i2p, and taking on all of the flaws therein of the model)
(2:16:18 PM) anonimal: No single system should be trusted to integrate in any app. Thus the reason I invented Sekreta.
(2:16:42 PM) anonimal: Now I have to deal with a bunch of club swingers who refuse to engage in an actual technical discussion.
(2:16:48 PM) anonimal: So, to answer 1),
(2:16:59 PM) anonimal: Current state = whatever you put into it. This is an open source project.
(2:17:01 PM) sarang: I'll jump in exactly once to say that I'm here with an open mind to find out what I can tell others who ask about what to expect, either from kovri, a new effort, or none of these. I am uninterested in its political history, encumbered as it may be
(2:17:13 PM) anonimal: Ignorance is bliss.
(2:17:13 PM) oneiric_: kovri in its current state has a number of bugs and design issues, a number of which i have come to understand originate in i2pd
(2:17:38 PM) moneromooo: If you persist in being insulting, people will start being insulting to you.
(2:17:41 PM) oneiric_: orignal and the i2pd crew have lived with that code for the lifespan of kovri, making improvements
(2:17:43 PM) anonimal: Leave kovri development to oneiric_ and I and anyone else who has an understanding of kovri, which is almost no one from monero.
(2:18:06 PM) anonimal: To answer 2); it is fully-functioning, what is the question?
(2:18:22 PM) anonimal: To answer 3); what alternatives? What do you mean?
(2:18:24 PM) oneiric_: they want a rubber stamp?
(2:19:39 PM) ferretinjapan [ferretinja@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/ferretinjapan] entered the room.
(2:19:41 PM) sgp_: Question 1: how well does Kovri meet the current requirements of an i2p C++ router, irrespective of your opinion about using one anonymity network
(2:19:42 PM) rehrar: oneiric_: does the amount of bugs and design issues inherited from i2pd justify starting from scratch?
(2:20:33 PM) rehrar: ok wait, hold up. Let me clarify one more thing about this meeting, otherwise we're going to just keep going in circles.
(2:20:58 PM) oneiric_: rehrar: imho it does. but i'm not the first to echo that, an impl from scratch, has a better chance at being a solid router
(2:20:59 PM) jtgrassie: From the readme "A free, decentralized, anonymity technology based on I2P's open specifications"
(2:21:00 PM) anonimal: It's a functioning i2p c++ router. Definte the requirements. It works enough to use it. Did any of you actually pay attention to the kovri defcon talk?
(2:21:04 PM) rehrar: Yes there are a bunch of Monero people here, and yes there are a bunch of people here without anonymity network expertise. These people are not necessarily here to make suggestions (so that's a strawman right there), theya re there to learn about the state of the project
(2:21:17 PM) anonimal: I literally demonstrated proof of concept that kovri functions as an i2p router. How is that even a question.
(2:21:36 PM) rehrar: this is indeed a point of Monero interest, because I believe if the community thinks kovri is still something worth doing, they would be potentially interested in allocating more funding, depending on the circumstanecs and technical state
(2:21:45 PM) anonimal: re: question 2 rehrar, if that's done, it should be done on the side.
(2:22:22 PM) rehrar: this meeting is serving multiple purposes right now, and we have to be ok with that.
(2:22:57 PM) anonimal: So, let me provide a timeline because I've been here longer than anyone else in this current meeting/conversation. It's important, because to understand the future, you must understand the past.
(2:23:08 PM) anonimal: If I weren't typing, I would simply say it. But here are. I'll need a minute or two.
(2:23:47 PM) oneiric_: i think that we should take kovri more-or-less as it is, bugfix, and work on code that isn't frustrating to dig through.
(2:23:49 PM) ErCiccione: anonimal: let's just not use a provoking tone. I think the tension is already high enough
(2:24:46 PM) MoroccanMalinois: If it is "fully functioning" now, then it was "fully functioning" 2 years ago ...
(2:25:12 PM) hyc: fwiw, by the time of Defcon, Kovri had declared "alpha release". that implies a lot of known issues to be addressed in a subsequent "beta release"
(2:25:49 PM) rehrar: MoroccanMalinois: has anything of substance (in respect to code) changed since the alpha release?
(2:26:23 PM) rehrar: at this point, I don't care if it's good or bad changes. I'm just scrolling through commits and see little code work.
(2:26:49 PM) rehrar: oneiric_ and anonimal can respond as well
(2:27:35 PM) MoroccanMalinois: rehrar That's a sujective question :)
(2:27:49 PM) endogenic: disagree MoroccanMalinois
(2:28:03 PM) jtgrassie: ^
(2:28:16 PM) sgp_: What changed since the alpha release?
(2:28:27 PM) oneiric_: rehrar: i have some commits that have been open for months
(2:28:39 PM) oneiric_: since the new year, been working on ntcp2
(2:31:25 PM) ErCiccione: while anonimal writes, could sean share some insight of the situation of the repo? i too noticed many PR haven't been merged for a long time
(2:32:03 PM) kovri-slack: <sean> Yes, the PRs are located here: https://gitlab.com/kovri-project/kovri/merge_requests
(2:32:39 PM) ErCiccione: i'm talking about also kovri-docs and -site
(2:32:45 PM) kovri-slack: <sean> We haven't completed many merges since the transition to gitlab. They've mostly been email updates, etc.
(2:32:53 PM) jtgrassie: https://gitlab.com/kovri-project/kovri/compare/v0.1.0-alpha...master
(2:33:27 PM) sgp_: sean the transition to GitLab was around September, right?
(2:33:43 PM) jtgrassie: Thats changes between alpha and master
(2:33:49 PM) kovri-slack: <sean> I haven't enforced the merges since they usually require rebasing or have authorization issues (since the merge power isn't transitioned when a new user is given merge authority).
(2:34:51 PM) kovri-slack: <sean> My goal has been to wait for us all to get together after the end-of-year slowdown to make sure that we have a clean merge.
(2:34:56 PM) sgp_: jtgrassie: the majority of the commits are housekeeping-related
(2:35:14 PM) ErCiccione: why wasn't that addressed sean? I still have Kovri in my FFS and there are many translations work still waiting to be merged. Considerable hours of work have been spent there
(2:35:31 PM) kovri-slack: <sean> It's almost all tests, IIRC.
(2:35:35 PM) jtgrassie: yes. That's whats been done since alpha (outside of unmerged PRs)
(2:35:51 PM) jtgrassie: e.g. not a great deal
(2:36:01 PM) anonimal: jtgrassie: you're looking at committed work. As I've said probably a thousand times now, that doesn't account for teaching; which took up a lot of my time.
(2:36:08 PM) anonimal: Here:
(2:36:44 PM) jtgrassie: I was responding to "What changed since the alpha release?"
(2:37:16 PM) anonimal: And I'm responding by clarifying by what's changed. And if anyone actually fucking read my FFS, you would see how clearly I document what is completed.
(2:37:29 PM) ***anonimal paste incoming
(2:37:46 PM) jtgrassie: I thought we were not discussing FFS
(2:38:08 PM) jtgrassie: Just state of Kovri
(2:38:25 PM) hyc: if he's putting status reports in his FFS, then that's on-topic
(2:38:27 PM) oneiric_: yeah, supposed to be...
(2:38:33 PM) jtgrassie: k
(2:39:27 PM) eamonnw [eamonnw@faeroes.sdf.org] entered the room.
(2:41:57 PM) anonimal: https://paste.debian.net/plain/1061784
(2:43:42 PM) sgp_: anonimal I appreciate the timeline, but it isn't very useful for the discussion
(2:45:04 PM) anonimal: It's very useful. You know what is also is useful? Why don't we discuss your familial ties to U.S. intelligence?
(2:45:14 PM) anonimal: I mean, you *do* have close ties to the U.S. military, do you not?
(2:45:21 PM) anonimal: This affects Kovri and anonymity.
(2:45:23 PM) endogenic: sgp_: may i suggest pointing out the problem concretely?
(2:45:37 PM) endogenic: and i would just ignore the reply btw
(2:45:40 PM) sgp_: anonimal: I think it's totally out of line to discuss my family's occupations. I'm disgusted
(2:45:50 PM) ErCiccione: Let's just go forward please. There are some ideas about Kovri's future. Does anyone want to share one?
(2:46:13 PM) anonimal: sgp_: nice try, but notice how you evade more than answer.
(2:46:14 PM) ErCiccione: anonimal: please no personal attacks, this meeting is becoming a joke
(2:46:31 PM) jtgrassie: I have come to this late (sorry, I just didn't have the time in 2015/2016!)
(2:46:41 PM) endogenic: ErCiccione: just ignore it
(2:46:59 PM) anonimal: endogenic: do you wish to divulge your bad practices too?
(2:47:09 PM) anonimal: 1) what are you people doing here?
(2:47:10 PM) sarang: Ok, people are being treated poorly. I'm out.
(2:47:15 PM) rehrar: no, actually I believe with this new information we can wrap up this meeting with a little bow
(2:47:16 PM) hyc: we're 47 minutes into this guys
(2:47:21 PM) ***MoroccanMalinois suggests https://gitlab.com/kovri-project/kovri/issues/1000 ?
(2:47:24 PM) oneiric_: yes, absolutely. let monero tie into whatever they see fit, a bugfixed kovri, zero-i2p, etc. lets build kovri into the most badass, minimalistic i2p router
(2:47:27 PM) rehrar: we cannot have a productive meeting about kovri
(2:47:30 PM) hyc: what is a useful outcome we can expect from this meeting?
(2:47:35 PM) endogenic: rehrar sure we can
(2:47:40 PM) rehrar: hyc, at this point, nothing
(2:47:47 PM) anonimal: No one has any real questions at this point
(2:47:54 PM) anonimal: I've presented solutions for monero
(2:48:07 PM) anonimal: Can someone rephrase a question?
(2:48:12 PM) rehrar: meeting after party in #monero-community, where I'll discuss the FFS stuff, and my opinions on it
(2:48:16 PM) anonimal: A truly pressing question that they feel is kovri related?
(2:48:28 PM) MoroccanMalinois: Any update on https://gitlab.com/kovri-project/kovri/issues/1000 ?
(2:48:35 PM) moneromooo: I have one. Are you going to work on kovri some more, or only sekreta ?
(2:48:42 PM) oneiric_: is there any point in trying to salvage kovri, or will this project continue to be torpedoed?
(2:48:52 PM) endogenic: oneiric_: it's up to us
(2:49:07 PM) anonimal: MoroccanMalinois: partially yes, if you read the recent monero i2p issue, I give at least one reason for hard forking
(2:49:14 PM) anonimal: endogenic: "us"?
(2:49:23 PM) anonimal: This isn't your project. You're welcome to fork it.
(2:49:34 PM) anonimal: moneromooo: yes both
(2:49:42 PM) asymptotically: anonimal: if the kovri rewrite (tini2p?) ends up actually getting developed, would sekreta support it?
(2:49:49 PM) anonimal: Yes of course
(2:49:59 PM) jtgrassie: If there's any forking of c++ i2p it should be i2pd - much cleaner
(2:50:03 PM) anonimal: But my god, you people are obsessed with i2p when there are literally better up-and-coming solutions
(2:50:04 PM) sgp_: it's up to each contributor what to work on, but I don't expect Monero will want to use Kovri as-is
(2:50:19 PM) anonimal: I detailed this to the T in all of my recent writings. How can you not see this by now.
(2:50:19 PM) oneiric_: jtgrassie: i'm not forking kovri
(2:50:19 PM) jtgrassie: ^
(2:50:27 PM) hyc: anonimal: it sounds like if you believe you have time to do both kovri and sekreta, that not much work remains to be done in kovri?
(2:51:00 PM) jtgrassie: oneiric_: me neither!
(2:51:31 PM) oneiric_: anyway, at least for monero, there are issues with forking i2pd
(2:51:39 PM) jtgrassie: true
(2:51:51 PM) anonimal: hyc: that depends
(2:51:58 PM) oneiric_: zero-i2p sounds like a good interim solution
(2:52:08 PM) jtgrassie: oneiric_: agreed
(2:52:16 PM) oneiric_: but long-term, does monero want to commit to a java dependency?
(2:52:24 PM) anonimal: #monero-dev
(2:52:25 PM) hyc: oneiric_: No.
(2:52:35 PM) jtgrassie: ^
(2:52:51 PM) oneiric_: so even if we kept kovri, we need to strip out all i2pd code anyway
(2:52:52 PM) rehrar: that's why we do plugins :D
(2:53:17 PM) oneiric_: so spend who knows how many hours doing that
(2:53:27 PM) sgp_: All right, so it seems like anonimal doesn't want to have the Monero-site part of the discussion in #kovri. If there are no more Kovri questions, we can move to #monero-community
(2:53:42 PM) oneiric_: or work together on a great design for something we can build from scratch in a similar timeframe
(2:53:57 PM) anonimal: So, does anyone have an interest in timeline and competition?
(2:54:05 PM) hyc: #1 rule in crypto - don't roll your own
(2:54:06 PM) oneiric_: please stop derailing productive discussion
(2:54:16 PM) hyc: all this talk of build from scratch is massively misguided IMO
(2:54:51 PM) oneiric_: i'm specifically not rolling my own crypto. that argument is disengenuine
(2:54:57 PM) hyc: anonimal: yes, my question was kind of getting at a timeline
(2:57:04 PM) serhack left the room (quit: Remote host closed the connection).
(2:57:16 PM) anonimal: Timeline, lookup Ire, lookup LLARP/LokiNet
(2:57:43 PM) anonimal: How I'm paid in the future depends on how much time I can provide
(2:58:35 PM) hyc: this kind of feeds into "obsession with i2p" - Tor has #1 mindshare. I presume i2p has #2. Anything else will be in a stark minority.
(2:59:17 PM) ferretinjapan left the room ("Leaving").
(2:59:29 PM) hyc: code wise LLARP/LokiNet sounds like they've done a good job integrating into their monero fork already
(2:59:49 PM) anonimal: Yep
(2:59:53 PM) hyc: which makes it attractive to consider, but if there's only a small population of users, it can't really serve well for anonymity
(3:01:52 PM) hyc: it has to be head and shoulders superior to tor and i2p to attract attention and grow a significant userbase
(3:02:09 PM) anonimal: From a probability/obfuscation approach, that is correct. But, on the other hand, the nature of the network will ultimately show the chinks in the armor.
(3:02:47 PM) anonimal: For example, katzenpost is not as popular but has different technology in place to decrease correlation that Tor does not have; regardless of how many users are using Tor.
(3:03:26 PM) ErCiccione: The meeting can be declared concluded here. I'm very disappointed of the result, but i cannot say it was totally unexpected. i hope it helped at least to start the conversation again and the creation of ideas
(3:03:43 PM) anonimal: A meeting requires topic points
(3:03:55 PM) anonimal: Where were the topic points. Where were the concrete questions? I answered every question given so far.
(3:04:03 PM) ErCiccione: please guys keep talking, but this is not a meeting anymore. i apologize for the result.
(3:04:15 PM) oneiric_: i had multiple concrete questions
(3:04:26 PM) endogenic: ErCiccione: dont expect a result you didnt cause, imo. what problems or questions did you ask or need solved. just ask
(3:04:28 PM) anonimal: Were they answered?
(3:05:14 PM) anonimal: If I missed them, please let me know. I'm looking again.
(3:05:27 PM) oneiric_: one was re: long-term java dependency. as far as what to do going forward with kovri, if you agree with my approach for a redesign
(3:06:07 PM) oneiric_: whether ripping out / replacing i2pd code was more worthwhile than just starting over
(3:06:23 PM) ErCiccione: endogenic: I just wanted to have a clear discussion about Kovri, it's not about my specific question, i could have asked them anytime.
(3:06:43 PM) sarang left the room.
(3:07:20 PM) ErCiccione: anonimal: if i didn't have topic point is because i didn't have time to create any. You know i organized this meeting in few days, with a sudden change of time, and i got no feedback on anybody from Kovri for days
(3:07:31 PM) fort3hlulz [~fort3hlul@173.38.117.83] entered the room.
(3:07:40 PM) anonimal: Alright, no sweat
(3:08:10 PM) ErCiccione: i knew there were idea and concernes. I just wanted to give people the possibility to talk and ask
(3:08:26 PM) anonimal: oneiric_: as I've said for years now, I've been actively replacing i2pd code. At this point, it's my personal interest to start from scratch as I had recommended from the beginning because it would've saved time and money. How anyone else wishes to proceed is their choice. This is an open source project after all.
(3:08:41 PM) anonimal: So, we can continue the rip-out, that's fine.
(3:09:06 PM) luigi1111w [~luigi1111@unaffiliated/luigi1111] entered the room.
(3:09:12 PM) hyc: ok, given the invective from orignal, sounds like getting as much distance from i2pd code as possible is a good idea
(3:09:53 PM) sarang [sid248211@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-eswltusphnwcxwwf] entered the room.
(3:09:57 PM) anonimal: Yes, absolutely.
(3:10:22 PM) endogenic: how does everyone feel about tini2p?
(3:10:53 PM) msvb-mob: endogenic: Fluffy likes it I guess, has anybody else tested tini2p?
(3:11:09 PM) endogenic: tini2p is oneiric's proposal isnt it?
(3:11:32 PM) anonimal: I don't know, but psi has already done the C router
(3:11:48 PM) anonimal: There are plenty of implementations, thus the need for a unified API.
(3:11:54 PM) oneiric_: yeah, so far it's still in proof-of-concept stage
(3:12:31 PM) hyc: and ok, if there's a lot of existing code, and of good quality, then we should be reusing as much as possible, not wiritng from scratch
(3:12:55 PM) hyc: not rewriting
(3:13:31 PM) oneiric_: hyc: if i had a clear direction to work on kovri, then i'd be doing that
(3:15:56 PM) endogenic: anonimal: are you interested in working with oneiric on a minimal router? oneiric: are any of the alternate implementations actually suitable for monero integration?
(3:16:34 PM) endogenic: like the psi thing
(3:18:18 PM) oneiric_: i don't know. lokinet looks new, but claims to already be working with other coins
(3:18:39 PM) oneiric_: they seem to do their own coin too
(3:18:43 PM) NeuroScr: we’re not working with other coins
(3:18:51 PM) NeuroScr: it’s just that it can work with any coin
(3:19:27 PM) oneiric_: oh, i thought some projects were already using it?
(3:19:38 PM) NeuroScr: no I think that’s i2pd, anoncoin
(3:19:49 PM) oneiric_: oh, my mistake then
(3:21:31 PM) NeuroScr: there are about 4 forks of the loki coin that will likely inherit it when it’s integrated with the coin-side
(3:24:34 PM) endogenic: oneiric_: sounds like you must make a recommendation to the monero project during a dev meeting about what's suitable for integration
(3:25:23 PM) oneiric_: ooo yay, does that fall on me?
(3:26:26 PM) NeuroScr: does any one else assert that I2P has latency and bandwidth problems?
(3:26:28 PM) oneiric_: thanks to everyone who showed up to the meeting, and offered your time and input
(3:26:48 PM) hyc: ok, ttyl
(3:27:31 PM) oneiric_: sorry it wasn't more productive
(3:28:49 PM) endogenic: do we need someone to make it more productive?
(3:30:20 PM) oneiric_: we need all the steam about FFS to blow over
(3:30:41 PM) endogenic: what does that have to do with our own decisions about what to do?
(3:30:41 PM) oneiric_: spent like literally half the meeting dealing with that
(3:30:55 PM) oneiric_: nothing, just venting
(3:31:13 PM) anonimal: "our"?
(3:32:09 PM) oneiric_: i'll compile an agenda for next meeting to help keep things more focused
(3:32:16 PM) endogenic: sounds like a good idea
(3:33:03 PM) anonimal: endogenic: all my work so far has been toward creating a minimal router. One of the earliest github issues goes into this discussion.
(3:33:12 PM) anonimal: If he wants to contribute to that, then yes.
(3:33:42 PM) oneiric_: anonimal: a lot of my recent initiative have been based on those sentiments
(3:34:05 PM) anonimal: endogenic: Are there other implementations? Yes, and some support other API's. We've been chatting about this in #monero-community right now.
(3:38:56 PM) hyc: what's sub-optimal about using SOCKS?
(3:39:10 PM) anonimal: Can't create tunnels on the fly
(3:39:21 PM) anonimal: It's a pretty ok solution for basic functionality.
(3:39:42 PM) hyc: sounds like it will do whatever monerod and monero-wallet needs already. yes?
(3:39:46 PM) NeuroScr: all you need is tcp functionality
(3:39:52 PM) NeuroScr: why do you need tunnels on the fly?
(3:40:27 PM) anonimal: Sekreta goes into some detail as to why.
(3:40:47 PM) NeuroScr: I read your documents, but I don’t recall that part
(3:41:35 PM) anonimal: Read again. s/channel/tunnel/
(3:42:56 PM) ErCiccione left the room (quit: Remote host closed the connection).
(3:45:34 PM) NeuroScr: psi is explaining to me how socks and i2p don’t work well together
(3:46:59 PM) anonimal: If he's talking about DNS and shimming, that's not the issue at hand.
(3:47:28 PM) NeuroScr: he’s not
(3:47:36 PM) anonimal: What's the issue then?
(3:49:49 PM) anonimal: btw monero tx's can be sent over the socks proxy. It's been done. There's no technical reason for it not to.