lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Chuck Ebbert]

lease.openlogging.org is unreachable today.

So I guess I need to set up a cron job to renew my lease every
minute/hour/day/whatever so I can actually download new kernel
releases when they come out?  I can't even examine the code I
downloaded yesterday without that lease...  Now that's what I call
having my source code held hostage!

--
Please take it as a sign of my infinite respect for you,
that I insist on you doing all the work.
                                        -- Rusty Russell

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Alan Cox]

On Sad, 2004-12-25 at 06:20, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> lease.openlogging.org is unreachable today.
> 
> So I guess I need to set up a cron job to renew my lease every
> minute/hour/day/whatever so I can actually download new kernel
> releases when they come out?  I can't even examine the code I
> downloaded yesterday without that lease...  Now that's what I call
> having my source code held hostage!

The tar ball edition works perfectly 8)

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Larry McVoy]

On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 12:24:48PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sad, 2004-12-25 at 06:20, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> > lease.openlogging.org is unreachable today.
> > 
> > So I guess I need to set up a cron job to renew my lease every
> > minute/hour/day/whatever so I can actually download new kernel
> > releases when they come out?  I can't even examine the code I
> > downloaded yesterday without that lease...  Now that's what I call
> > having my source code held hostage!
> 
> The tar ball edition works perfectly 8)

And a very Merry Christmas to you too Alan.  You're welcome for all that
BK has done for you and the kernel effort, always a pleasure to work with
such polite people.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

bkcvs seems to have stale data [was Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable]

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > lease.openlogging.org is unreachable today.
> > > 
> > > So I guess I need to set up a cron job to renew my lease every
> > > minute/hour/day/whatever so I can actually download new kernel
> > > releases when they come out?  I can't even examine the code I
> > > downloaded yesterday without that lease...  Now that's what I call
> > > having my source code held hostage!
> > 
> > The tar ball edition works perfectly 8)
> 
> And a very Merry Christmas to you too Alan.  You're welcome for all that
> BK has done for you and the kernel effort, always a pleasure to work with
> such polite people.

:-)

Is something wrong with bkcvs? 2.6.10 was released 40 hours ago, but I
still see -rc3 when I update... I'm doing

time rsync -zav --delete rsync.kernel.org::pub/scm/linux/kernel/bkcvs/linux-2.5 .

and cvs update.
								Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!

Re: bkcvs seems to have stale data [was Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable]

[Larry McVoy]

On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 01:22:51PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Is something wrong with bkcvs? 2.6.10 was released 40 hours ago, but I
> still see -rc3 when I update... I'm doing

There is nothing wrong on our end, the conversion happened and was pushed
to master.kernel.org about 30 hours ago as part of the normal nightly update.

I logged into to master.kernel.org and checked:

lm@hera:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/bkcvs/linux-2.5(0)$ grep v2.6.10 ChangeSet,v
        v2_6_10:1.24782
	v2_6_10-rc3:1.24616
	v2_6_10-rc2:1.24188
	v2_6_10-rc1:1.23259
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Larry McVoy]

On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 01:20:34AM -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> lease.openlogging.org is unreachable today.

Yup it is, I'm trying to reboot it remotely but it doesn't seem to want
to come up.  I'll go in and figure it out, it will be about 30 minutes 
before I can get there though.  

> So I guess I need to set up a cron job to renew my lease every
> minute/hour/day/whatever so I can actually download new kernel
> releases when they come out?  I can't even examine the code I
> downloaded yesterday without that lease...  Now that's what I call
> having my source code held hostage!

We'll put an offsite backup in place so it will take two failures to
cause you a problem.

In general the leases are good for 30 days so only a few people should
be effected by this.  
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Larry McVoy]

The interesting thing is that the code already has a backup in it and I just
checked that code path and it works.

Has anyone else been shut down because of lease.openlogging.org being down
and if so what version of BK were you running please?

It is true that both servers are at our offices so if the network had been
down you would have been out of luck.  We'll create some more backups and
scatter them around the US, that's no problem.  But if the logic in the 
code to get them is busted then we need to fix that.

Things should be stabilized now, the machine went up and down a few times
after my last "it's OK mail", it turned out we had a dieing ethernet card;
it's been replaced and we seem stable now.  
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Måns Rullgård]

Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> writes:

> The interesting thing is that the code already has a backup in it and I just
> checked that code path and it works.
>
> Has anyone else been shut down because of lease.openlogging.org being down
> and if so what version of BK were you running please?
>
> It is true that both servers are at our offices so if the network had been
> down you would have been out of luck.

I've been bitten by that one, as I occasionally work off-line.  Is
there some way I can make BK renew the leases a week or so before they
expire?

It would also be nice if a simple read-only 'get' were allowed without
a lease at all.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@inprovide.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Larry McVoy]

On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 11:26:42AM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> I've been bitten by that one, as I occasionally work off-line.  Is
> there some way I can make BK renew the leases a week or so before they
> expire?

In theory, we do that already.  By you can always do a "bk lease renew"
and that will get you a new lease.  "bk lease show" will show you your
lease.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Måns Rullgård]

Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> writes:

> On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 11:26:42AM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> I've been bitten by that one, as I occasionally work off-line.  Is
>> there some way I can make BK renew the leases a week or so before they
>> expire?
>
> In theory, we do that already.  By you can always do a "bk lease renew"
> and that will get you a new lease.  "bk lease show" will show you your
> lease.

Looking closer, the problem is that my hostname keeps changing,
depending on which network the laptop is on, if any.  I guess the
simple solution is to remember to renew the lease for the no-net
hostname before going offline.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@inprovide.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Larry McVoy]

On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 07:06:52PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 11:26:42AM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> >> I've been bitten by that one, as I occasionally work off-line.  Is
> >> there some way I can make BK renew the leases a week or so before they
> >> expire?
> >
> > In theory, we do that already.  By you can always do a "bk lease renew"
> > and that will get you a new lease.  "bk lease show" will show you your
> > lease.
> 
> Looking closer, the problem is that my hostname keeps changing,
> depending on which network the laptop is on, if any.  I guess the
> simple solution is to remember to renew the lease for the no-net
> hostname before going offline.

The other answer, which I'm happy to consider, is to come up with a unique
id on a per host basis and use that for the leases.  That's not a fun task,
does anyone have code (BSD license please) which does that?
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Martin Dalecki]

On 2004-12-26, at 19:18, Larry McVoy wrote:
>
> The other answer, which I'm happy to consider, is to come up with a 
> unique
> id on a per host basis and use that for the leases.  That's not a fun 
> task,
> does anyone have code (BSD license please) which does that?

Nothing even moderately portable like this exists. The best 
approximation
imaginable would be starting to collect MAC address id's... But thats 
of corse
the wrong protocol layer.

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Alan Cox]

On Sul, 2004-12-26 at 18:18, Larry McVoy wrote:
> The other answer, which I'm happy to consider, is to come up with a unique
> id on a per host basis and use that for the leases.  That's not a fun task,
> does anyone have code (BSD license please) which does that?

libuuid does that on straight statistical probability - what properties
do you want your id to have ?

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Martin Dalecki]

On 2004-12-26, at 21:37, Alan Cox wrote:

> On Sul, 2004-12-26 at 18:18, Larry McVoy wrote:
>> The other answer, which I'm happy to consider, is to come up with a 
>> unique
>> id on a per host basis and use that for the leases.  That's not a fun 
>> task,
>> does anyone have code (BSD license please) which does that?
>
> libuuid does that on straight statistical probability - what properties
> do you want your id to have ?
>

Simply storing the first hostname used in a dot file for subsequent 
reuse on client side,
would be even easier I guess. That would be basically the same strategy 
as used by
ssh with regard to host keys. It wouldn't even perhaps make protocol 
changes necessary.
But still not a perfect solution... (Remember the times you have delete 
something from
.ssh/known_hosts).

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Florian Weimer]

* Martin Dalecki:

> Simply storing the first hostname used in a dot file for subsequent
> reuse on client side, would be even easier I guess.

You mean localhost.localdomain? 8-)

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Martin Dalecki]

On 2004-12-27, at 00:01, Florian Weimer wrote:

> * Martin Dalecki:
>
>> Simply storing the first hostname used in a dot file for subsequent
>> reuse on client side, would be even easier I guess.
>
> You mean localhost.localdomain? 8-)

No the first value that worked in the whole setup of course. And I said 
it clearly that would
be just a workaround because uniqueness can be established in the 
easiest way on the side of
the part which is interested in the persistency - the server peer not 
the client.
"Simple" http servers do it by sending cookies around. Other call it 
"tokens".

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 12:13:55AM +0100, Martin Dalecki wrote:

> No the first value that worked in the whole setup of course. And I
> said it clearly that would be just a workaround because uniqueness
> can be established in the easiest way on the side of the part which
> is interested in the persistency - the server peer not the client.

actually, the bk lease server could give out id's and those could be
caches in ~/.bk<whatever> --- server side it could be a counter that
you just xor with some s3kr1t value and then blind using a hash or
cryto-function, something good-enough (statistically unlikely to
break) is all that is required, it doesn't have to be perfect surely?

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Martin Dalecki]

On 2004-12-27, at 01:03, Chris Wedgwood wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 12:13:55AM +0100, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
>> No the first value that worked in the whole setup of course. And I
>> said it clearly that would be just a workaround because uniqueness
>> can be established in the easiest way on the side of the part which
>> is interested in the persistency - the server peer not the client.
>
> actually, the bk lease server could give out id's and those could be
> caches in ~/.bk<whatever> --- server side it could be a counter that
> you just xor with some s3kr1t value and then blind using a hash or
> cryto-function, something good-enough (statistically unlikely to
> break) is all that is required, it doesn't have to be perfect surely?
>

Right that's precisely what's called a cookie or token. But it would 
involve
a change in the on-wire protocol.

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Horst von Brand]

Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> said:

[...]

> The other answer, which I'm happy to consider, is to come up with a unique
> id on a per host basis and use that for the leases.  That's not a fun task,
> does anyone have code (BSD license please) which does that?

MAC of eth0?
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                     Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria              +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile                Fax:  +56 32 797513

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 09:31:11PM -0300, Horst von Brand wrote:

> MAC of eth0?

that changes for people (most commonly laptops)

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Martin Dalecki]

On 2004-12-27, at 01:31, Horst von Brand wrote:

> Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> said:
>
> [...]
>
>> The other answer, which I'm happy to consider, is to come up with a 
>> unique
>> id on a per host basis and use that for the leases.  That's not a fun 
>> task,
>> does anyone have code (BSD license please) which does that?
>
> MAC of eth0?

ippp0?

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Larry McVoy]

On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 09:31:11PM -0300, Horst von Brand wrote:
> > The other answer, which I'm happy to consider, is to come up with a unique
> > id on a per host basis and use that for the leases.  That's not a fun task,
> > does anyone have code (BSD license please) which does that?
> 
> MAC of eth0?

As others have pointed out that won't work.

I'm trying to remember why we get leases on a per host basis and I think
it is for a simple reason, NFS.  We update the leases in your home
directory and if your home directory is nfs mounted then we can corrupt
the leases file due to races (yes, we saw this all the time when we had
one leases file).  So we stick the leases for a particular host in that
host's file.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Martin Dalecki]

On 2004-12-27, at 02:41, Larry McVoy wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 09:31:11PM -0300, Horst von Brand wrote:
>>> The other answer, which I'm happy to consider, is to come up with a 
>>> unique
>>> id on a per host basis and use that for the leases.  That's not a 
>>> fun task,
>>> does anyone have code (BSD license please) which does that?
>>
>> MAC of eth0?
>
> As others have pointed out that won't work.
>
> I'm trying to remember why we get leases on a per host basis and I 
> think
> it is for a simple reason, NFS.

Citing from: 
http://www.time-travellers.org/shane/papers/NFS_considered_harmful.html

"NFS fails at the goal of allowing a computer to access files over a 
network as if they were on a local disk. In many ways, NFS comes close 
to the objective, and in certain circumstances (detailed later), this 
is acceptable. However, the subtle differences can cause subtle bugs 
and greater system issues. The widespread misconception about the 
compatibility and transparency of NFS means that it is often used 
inappropriately, and often put into production when better, more 
acceptable solutions exist."

I don't know of a proper solution, other then writing in big letters
in the documentation about the circumstances under which you can shoot 
yourself in
the feet.

Where is NFSv4?

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Larry McVoy]

On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 03:40:38AM +0100, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> Citing from: 
> http://www.time-travellers.org/shane/papers/NFS_considered_harmful.html
> 
> "NFS fails at the goal of allowing a computer to access files over a 
> network as if they were on a local disk. In many ways, NFS comes close 
> to the objective, and in certain circumstances (detailed later), this 
> is acceptable. However, the subtle differences can cause subtle bugs 
> and greater system issues. The widespread misconception about the 
> compatibility and transparency of NFS means that it is often used 
> inappropriately, and often put into production when better, more 
> acceptable solutions exist."
> 
> I don't know of a proper solution, other then writing in big letters
> in the documentation about the circumstances under which you can shoot 
> yourself in
> the feet.

And that, my friends, is the difference between a project which is a hobby
and a project which is a product.  We don't have the option of saying "this
doesn't work".  
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Martin Dalecki]

On 2004-12-27, at 03:43, Larry McVoy wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 03:40:38AM +0100, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>>
>> I don't know of a proper solution, other then writing in big letters
>> in the documentation about the circumstances under which you can shoot
>> yourself in
>> the feet.
>
> And that, my friends, is the difference between a project which is a 
> hobby
> and a project which is a product.  We don't have the option of saying 
> "this
> doesn't work".

Fully agreed. And those are the reasons why the completely non 
professional
solutions, which I never saw in deployment of course...
like ... for example the pure hobby-student-project ClearCase are going 
to the
extent of requiring you to run their own networked filesystem if running
on Linux. They do it simply out of fun and for educational purposes and
because they where to dumb to find much easier solution which are out 
there ready
and waiting. They simply don't have to deal with something as 
exceptional as
customers. They love to spend about 10 man years to develop a reliable 
networked
filesystem which is OS minor version specific like burning money for 
heat...

OK I was just kidding. ;-)

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Ricky Beam]

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>for example the pure hobby-student-project ClearCase are going to the
>extent of requiring you to run their own networked filesystem if running
>on Linux.

WTF are talking about?  MVFS is required *everywhere* you want to use
dynamic views... solaris, aix, hpux, windows, and *yes* LINUX.

And MVFS is not 100% filesystem -- it's part fs, part db, part proxy, ...
(it's just weird, but I like it.)

--Ricky

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Bernd Eckenfels]

In article <20041227024346.GA3595@work.bitmover.com> you wrote:
> And that, my friends, is the difference between a project which is a hobby
> and a project which is a product.  We don't have the option of saying "this
> doesn't work".  

Thats why more and more commercial solutions do not use  licensing services
or dongles anymore. It just introduces to much failure possibilities.

Greetings
Bernd

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Ricky Beam]

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004, Martin Dalecki wrote:
...
>I don't know of a proper solution, other then writing in big letters
>in the documentation about the circumstances under which you can shoot
>yourself in
>the feet.
>
>Where is NFSv4?

The problem is the protocol, it's the fact that the directory is shared among
more than one machine.  It's the false assumption that a given location is
unique to just one machine.  Yes, I've fallen into this mess too. (And I wasn't
using NFS, btw.)

--Ricky

(no subject)

[Paul Mackerras]

Larry McVoy writes:

> Has anyone else been shut down because of lease.openlogging.org being down
> and if so what version of BK were you running please?

Yes, I had bk pull and bk export fail for me yesterday.  If I did a bk
pull it would sit there for a while and then put up a window saying it
couldn't get to lease.openlogging.org.  If I clicked OK, after a while
another window would come up with a similar message (but I didn't read
it carefully).

> It is true that both servers are at our offices so if the network had been
> down you would have been out of luck.

I did a traceroute and it looked like a network problem.  From memory
it stopped after about 10 hops, and it seems to be 17 hops to
openlogging.org from here now.

My setup is possibly a little unusual, and may be causing problems for
your lease code: I have my BK repos on a firewire-attached disk, which
I move from machine to machine - specifically, it commutes between home
and work with me.

Paul.

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Larry McVoy]

On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 01:20:34AM -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> lease.openlogging.org is unreachable today.
> 
> So I guess I need to set up a cron job to renew my lease every
> minute/hour/day/whatever so I can actually download new kernel
> releases when they come out?  I can't even examine the code I
> downloaded yesterday without that lease...  Now that's what I call
> having my source code held hostage!

It's back up.  Go to a repo and say "bk lease renew" and you should be
all set.  
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Chuck Ebbert]

Larry McVoy wrote:

> The interesting thing is that the code already has a backup in it and I just
> checked that code path and it works.

 Huh.  The first time the lease renewal hung up and I hit ctrl-C when it
didn't seem to be working (tcpdump showed a series of unanswered SYNs.)
Later I let it run to completion and it must have worked, but since there
was no output from the program I assumed it had just failed silently like
some other bitkeeper commands will do. Then the Christmas morning mayhem
hit and I didn't have any more time to play with it.

 You should output a confirmation message when 'bk lease renew' succeeds.

--
Please take it as a sign of my infinite respect for you,
that I insist on you doing all the work.
                                        -- Rusty Russell

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[James Bottomley]

> The interesting thing is that the code already has a backup in it and I just
> checked that code path and it works.
> 
> Has anyone else been shut down because of lease.openlogging.org being down
> and if so what version of BK were you running please?

I believe I've reported this problem to you and support@bitmover.com
several times.

There's something in BK that refuses to work when it can't contact
lease.openlogging.org, regardless of whether you just renewed the lease
or not.  This keeps biting me when I try to use BK disconnected from the
internet (usually while travelling).

This problem is certainly my single biggest headache with BK since it
means I can't go through my backlog of email and build the SCSI BK tree
when I'm travelling (which is often the only time I have available for
doing it).

My current version is bk 3.2.3 but it's been a problem on all prior
versions I've used as well.

James

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[Larry McVoy]

On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 10:12:10AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> > The interesting thing is that the code already has a backup in it and I just
> > checked that code path and it works.
> > 
> > Has anyone else been shut down because of lease.openlogging.org being down
> > and if so what version of BK were you running please?
> 
> I believe I've reported this problem to you and support@bitmover.com
> several times.
> 
> There's something in BK that refuses to work when it can't contact
> lease.openlogging.org, regardless of whether you just renewed the lease
> or not.  This keeps biting me when I try to use BK disconnected from the
> internet (usually while travelling).

I suspect that your hostname changes when you disconnect.  Leases are 
issued on a per host basis.  If you make your hostname constant when
you unplug it should work.  If it doesn't, let us know.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[James Bottomley]

On Sun, 2004-12-26 at 08:27 -0800, Larry McVoy wrote:
> I suspect that your hostname changes when you disconnect.  Leases are 
> issued on a per host basis.  If you make your hostname constant when
> you unplug it should work.  If it doesn't, let us know.

Well, that's a new one, but no, I have a fixed hostname which dhcp is
forbidden from changing.

James

Re: lease.openlogging.org is unreachable

[David Brownell]

> There's something in BK that refuses to work when it can't contact
> lease.openlogging.org, regardless of whether you just renewed the lease
> or not.  

For the record, I've seen this regularly too.  BK 3.2.3
was the last that showed it for me.  I'm glad to know
it wasn't just me ... but would be more glad if none
of us saw the problem!  :)

Last time I looked at the failure mode there was no issue
of network connectivity being missing, or even changing.
Host names on these systems don't change; neither do IP
addresses (though they're behind a NAT gateway).

>From memory (== may not be quite right), what I did was
"bk lease renew", then "bk pull" (or maybe clone; it failed
because it thought openlogging.org was playing hide/seek);
then "bk lease show" showed three (!!) current licences.

I've also had the "...unreachable" messages immediately after
renewing a lease, when cloning from a private tree but with
the network link down.  (That is, same as previous setup,
except the link is down.)  It's actually kind of annoying
to fail at the _end_ of a clone operation, leaving a tree
that doesn't seem recoverable, rather than at the start.

- Dave