rns.recipes

Anyone have issues with I2P interface stability?

I tried to configure i2pd and i2p interface on my reticulum devices but they kept disconnecting. The interfaces were up and connected, then they go down and disconnect and so on and so off.
When they were connected i saw some announces going through, but rarely, so the i2p seems to work somehow.
I tried on my raspberry pi 4 and pi zero 2w, 4 being the server and zero being the client, also connecting to a remote i2p server and using my laptop as another client, same thing.
From the few debugging i've done it seems like the tunnel is timing out or it's too slow to maintain a connection. I also experimented a little bit with i2p parameters like bandwidth, notransmit floodfill etc. I couldn't get it to over 60% status and the stability issues continued. I also let it run for a while to build up the connections, didn't seem to work in the end.

Kind of over with the ideas and low on time to invest, hope someone here figured this out already.

This just seems to be the nature of i2p for whatever reason. There's not much data being passed through i2p so if the issue is coming from not being used enough and then timing out then that'd make sense but I'm not familiar with the implementation of i2p enough to know if that's the case. With backbone connection announcements and data seem to go through constantly while with I2P the connections comes in bursts before the tunnel becomes unresponsive.

In general, it's been my experience that the I2P daemon needs to have been running for a long time before it finds reliable peers and connections become somewhat stable. Usually takes at least an hour or two, and sometimes the I2P network is just being weird and it's almost impossible to have a reliable connection for any reasonable amount of time.

In general, it's been my experience that the I2P daemon needs to have been running for a long time before it finds reliable peers and connections become somewhat stable. Usually takes at least an hour or two, and sometimes the I2P network is just being weird and it's almost impossible to have a reliable connection for any reasonable amount of time.

Thank you for helping me put, thought i've been doing something fundamentally wrong somewhere. The images from welo show the same behavior i had, good to know it's ok. I'll give it another shot and trust the process and let it run for few days.

What I find interesting: There are some I2P interfaces that seem to be a lot more stable than others.

• Lipetsk (la4nsp25gfq4uscmhe5g62c53b6blvfkeqs6faijv7c3y5tjv2ka.b32.i2p)
• SparkN0de (ccrlk4gdxkgrqr633b4msujteaf7gnqw5akxjiek5dhoosfmrdka.b32.i2p)
• Oren (q6qth2xl5fisekhvm2lbplprwaof4plkbh4cthjnlj2pck7ahp5q.b32.i2p)

are active most of the time and there is actually traffic in both directions. Are they doing something differently than everybody else?

Anonymous wrote:

What I find interesting: There are some I2P interfaces that seem to be a lot more stable than others.

• Lipetsk (la4nsp25gfq4uscmhe5g62c53b6blvfkeqs6faijv7c3y5tjv2ka.b32.i2p)
• SparkN0de (ccrlk4gdxkgrqr633b4msujteaf7gnqw5akxjiek5dhoosfmrdka.b32.i2p)
• Oren (q6qth2xl5fisekhvm2lbplprwaof4plkbh4cthjnlj2pck7ahp5q.b32.i2p)

are active most of the time and there is actually traffic in both directions. Are they doing something differently than everybody else?

Did you enter the I2P address on both the client and server or just the client side?

daylight-hub wrote:

Did you enter the I2P address on both the client and server or just the client side?

I don't know what exactly you mean. In the config? I put them under peers in my I2P Interface.

Anonymous wrote:

daylight-hub wrote:
> Did you enter the I2P address on both the client and server or just the client side?

I don't know what exactly you mean. In the config? I put them under peers in my I2P Interface.

Yes, in the Reticulum config file-- did you add the I2P address in peers on the server side too or just the client. I have been wondering if I can get away with just adding the server address on the client side or if the server also needs to know the client address?

daylight-hub wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
> daylight-hub wrote:
> > Did you enter the I2P address on both the client and server or just the client side?
>
> I don't know what exactly you mean. In the config? I put them under peers in my I2P Interface.

Yes, in the Reticulum config file-- did you add the I2P address in peers on the server side too or just the client. I have been wondering if I can get away with just adding the server address on the client side or if the server also needs to know the client address?

Do you mean using multiple I2P Interfaces, one for your own address and one for each address you want to connect to?
You can have just one I2P Interface and add everything under peers

Anonymous wrote:

daylight-hub wrote:
> Anonymous wrote:
> > daylight-hub wrote:
> > > Did you enter the I2P address on both the client and server or just the client side?
> >
> > I don't know what exactly you mean. In the config? I put them under peers in my I2P Interface.
>
> Yes, in the Reticulum config file-- did you add the I2P address in peers on the server side too or just the client. I have been wondering if I can get away with just adding the server address on the client side or if the server also needs to know the client address?

Do you mean using multiple I2P Interfaces, one for your own address and one for each address you want to connect to?
You can have just one I2P Interface and add everything under peers

That makes sense, but does the server need to have the client I2P addresses listed under peers too?

daylight-hub wrote:

That makes sense, but does the server need to have the client I2P addresses listed under peers too?

Ah, I think I get what you mean now, sorry. No, you don't need to have each others I2P addresses under peers, it's enough that one has it. Otherwise interface discovery would be kind of hard for I2P I guess.