Search Results

Search found 624 results on 25 pages for 'peer to peer'.

Page 2/25 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• peer to peer disk image transmission

  - by JackWu

  Installing linux/windows through pxe works smoothly for me. But downloading images(especially windows) is a headache. Let alone the time, bandwith usage is horrible. And p2p tech comes to my mind. But I have no clue how it works or where to start. Anyone knows how to setup p2p local network, and applies that on image transmission? Any advice, tutorials or experiences will be great. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Problem in peer-to-peer online connection.

  - by user130934

  I am developing an Messenger application where i am trying to use an peer-to-peer online connection. But for that i have to present my own user interface to configure the Internet connection. how to do it?.. Please help me...

  Read the article

• What services exist for finding someone specific to then run your own peer to peer software with?

  - by psr

  If you give people peer to peer software (such as a web sockets application if the peer to peer part gets implemented, but could be anything) the first step for some kinds of applications is to find a specific person and try to connect with them. If neither of you has a URI (and knows what it is) you need a third party to handle finding each other and verifying your identities. After that the third party isn't needed because you go peer to peer. I could of course write that third party software and put it up on a website, but then I would have to write that third party software and put it up on a website (or a server that isn't a website if that's how I want to do it). Does anyone offer this service? Ideally as a website and of course ideally free.

  Read the article

• How to build a game like HaxBall?

  - by Cengiz Frostclaw

  I'm a coder interested in game development, and I want to build a very simple p2p (real time) game. The perfect example for this is haxball. The client/server model doesn't matter, it could be like haxball (i.e. the room creator is the host) or changing host, or the server is host (if there is such a thing) I just want to learn the basics to create a field where players can move their characters in real time. So where should I start? Please guide me into the right direction. And with examples please. I found out that RTMFP does what I seek, but how do I use it? I know ActionScript 3.0, but no idea how to setup a multiplayer game. Please help ! Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• WCF App using Peer Chat app as example does not work.

  - by splate

  I converted a VB .Net 3.5 app to use peer to peer WCF using the available Microsoft example of the Chat app. I made sure that I copied the app.config file for the sample(modified the names for my app), added the appropriate references. I followed all the tutorials and added the appropriate tags and structure in my app code. Everything runs without any errors, but the clients only get messages from themselves and not from the other clients. The sample chat application does run just fine with multiple clients. The only difference I could find is that the server on the sample is targeting the framework 2.0, but I assume that is wrong and it is building it in at least 3.0 or the System.ServiceModel reference would break. Is there something that has to be registered that the sample is doing behind the scenes or is the sample a special project type? I am confused. My next step is to copy all my classes and logic from my app to the sample app, but that is likely a lot of work. Here is my Client App.config: <client><endpoint name="thldmEndPoint" address="net.p2p://thldmMesh/thldmServer" binding="netPeerTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="PeerTcpConfig" contract="THLDM_Client.IGameService"></endpoint></client> <bindings><netPeerTcpBinding> <binding name="PeerTcpConfig" port="0"> <security mode="None"></security> <resolver mode="Custom"> <custom address="net.tcp://localhost/thldmServer" binding="netTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="TcpConfig"></custom> </resolver> </binding></netPeerTcpBinding> <netTcpBinding> <binding name="TcpConfig"> <security mode="None"></security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> Here is my server App.config: <services> <service name="System.ServiceModel.PeerResolvers.CustomPeerResolverService"> <host> <baseAddresses> <add baseAddress="net.tcp://localhost/thldmServer"/> </baseAddresses> </host> <endpoint address="net.tcp://localhost/thldmServer" binding="netTcpBinding" bindingConfiguration="TcpConfig" contract="System.ServiceModel.PeerResolvers.IPeerResolverContract"> </endpoint> </service> </services> <bindings> <netTcpBinding> <binding name="TcpConfig"> <security mode="None"></security> </binding> </netTcpBinding> </bindings> Thanks ahead of time.

  Read the article

• Machine Learning Algorithm for Peer-to-Peer Nodes

  - by FreshCode

  I want to apply machine learning to a classification problem in a parallel environment. Several independent nodes, each with multiple on/off sensors, can communicate their sensor data with the goal of classifying an event as defined by a heuristic, training data or both. Each peer will be measuring the same data from their unique perspective and will attempt to classify the result while taking into account that any neighbouring node (or its sensors or just the connection to the node) could be faulty. Nodes should function as equal peers and determine the most likely classification by communicating their results. Ultimately each node should make a decision based on their own sensor data and their peers' data. If it matters, false positives are OK for certain classifications (albeit undesirable) but false negatives would be totally unacceptable. Given that each final classification will receive good or bad feedback, what would be an appropriate machine learning algorithm to approach this problem with if the nodes could communicate with each other to determine the most likely classification?

  Read the article

• Can anyone give me a sample java socket programming for doing a peer to peer for 3 systems?

  - by Sadesh Kumar N

  I am doing an university project. I need some sample programs on peer to peer programs in java socket programming. Every where people are telling to add a server socket in the client program. I am in a confusion. Can a single program having server socket and client socket will do or i have to create two programs of one initiating a system and another peer program running thrice to solve the problem. or i need to create three programs for three peer systems. I am not clear on the architecture of building peer to peer programs using java sockets. Can some one help me giving a simple program on how to create a peer to peer connection between three systems. I know how to do a socket program for client server model and clear on the concept. But creating a peer to peer architecture sounds complex for me to understand. I also referred this thread. developing peer to peer in java The person commented second says" To make peer2peer app each client opens server socket too. When client A wishes to connect to client B it just connects to its socket. " Need some more sample and an explanation on how peer to peer java socket program works I dont want any external api like jxta to do this task. I need a clear picture on how it works alone with an example.

  Read the article

• Multiple Set Peer for VPN Failover

  - by Kyle Brandt

  I will have two Cisco routers at Location A serving the same internal networks, and one router in location B. Currently, I have one router in each location with a IPSec site-to-site tunnel connecting them. It looks something like: Location A: crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location B set peer 12.12.12.12 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Location B: crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location A set peer 11.11.11.11 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Can I achieve fail over by simply adding another set peer at location B?: Location A (New secondary Router, configuration on previous router stays the same): crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location B set peer 12.12.12.12 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Location B (Configuration Changed): crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location A set peer 11.11.11.11 ! 11.11.11.100 is the ip of the new second router at location A set peer 11.11.11.100 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Cisco Says: For crypto map entries created with the crypto map map-name seq-num ipsec-isakmp command, you can specify multiple peers by repeating this command. The peer that packets are actually sent to is determined by the last peer that the router heard from (received either traffic or a negotiation request from) for a given data flow. If the attempt fails with the first peer, Internet Key Exchange (IKE) tries the next peer on the crypto map list. But I don't fully understand that in the context of a failover scenerio (One of the routers as Location A blowing up).

  Read the article

• Peer-to-Peer call with Asterisk or Trixbox

  - by xRobot

  I have read skype is a p2p program !! Is there a way to configure Asterisk ( or Trixbox ) for make P2P call ?

  Read the article

• Peer to peer over 3G

  - by Cairo

  Hey I'm trying to get a CFStream connection going over 3G. I can get it working over wifi using the host name, but when I try to connect directly to the ip address it fails. Is there a guide out there on how to connect over 3G? Thanks ASH

  Read the article

• How to protect a peer-to-peer network from inappropriate content?

  - by Mike

  I’m developing a simple peer-to-peer app in .Net which should enable users to share specific content (text and picture files). As I've learned with my last question, inappropriate content can “relatively” easily be identified / controlled in a centralized environment. But what about a peer-to-peer network, what are the best methods to protect a decentralized system from unwanted (illegal) content? At the moment I only see the following two methods: A protocol (a set of rules) defines what kind of data (e.g. only .txt and jpg-files, not bigger than 20KB etc.) can be shared over the p2p-network and all clients (peers) must implement this protocol. If a peer doesn’t, it gets blocked by other peers. Pro: easy to implement. Con: It’s not possible to define the perfect protocol (I think eMail-Spam filters have the same problem) Some kind of rating/reputation system must be implemented (similar to stackoverflow), so “bad guys” and inappropriate content can be identified / blocked by other users. Pro: Would be very accurate. Con: Would be slow and in my view technically very hard to implement. Are there other/better solutions? Any answer or comment is highly appreciated.

  Read the article

• YaCy : le moteur de recherche open source et Peer-2-Peer en version 1.0, son réseau sécurisé indexe 1.4 milliard de documents

  YaCy : le moteur de recherche open source et Peer-2-Peer en version 1.0 Son réseau sécurisé totalise 1.4 milliard de documents indexés Nombre de moteurs de recherche émergents tentent de se distinguer des courants dominants par un meilleur respect de la vie privée et le non-traçage des utilisateurs. Mais il existe des alternatives qui vont encore plus loin dans ce domaine. YaCy sort aujourd'hui en version 1.0 après cinq années de développement. Il s'agit d'un moteur de recherche libre et décentralisé, permettant à chacun d'indexer une partie du Web (ou d'un Intranet) et de lancer des recherches sur son propre index ou sur l'ensemble des données disponibles sur son réseau Peer-2-Peer grand...

  Read the article

• Master-slave vs. peer-to-peer archictecture: benefits and problems

  - by Ashok_Ora

  Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE Almost two decades ago, I was a member of a database development team that introduced adaptive locking. Locking, the most popular concurrency control technique in database systems, is pessimistic. Locking ensures that two or more conflicting operations on the same data item don’t “trample” on each other’s toes, resulting in data corruption. In a nutshell, here’s the issue we were trying to address. In everyday life, traffic lights serve the same purpose. They ensure that traffic flows smoothly and when everyone follows the rules, there are no accidents at intersections. As I mentioned earlier, the problem with typical locking protocols is that they are pessimistic. Regardless of whether there is another conflicting operation in the system or not, you have to hold a lock! Acquiring and releasing locks can be quite expensive, depending on how many objects the transaction touches. Every transaction has to pay this penalty. To use the earlier traffic light analogy, if you have ever waited at a red light in the middle of nowhere with no one on the road, wondering why you need to wait when there’s clearly no danger of a collision, you know what I mean. The adaptive locking scheme that we invented was able to minimize the number of locks that a transaction held, by detecting whether there were one or more transactions that needed conflicting eyou could get by without holding any lock at all. In many “well-behaved” workloads, there are few conflicts, so this optimization is a huge win. If, on the other hand, there are many concurrent, conflicting requests, the algorithm gracefully degrades to the “normal” behavior with minimal cost. We were able to reduce the number of lock requests per TPC-B transaction from 178 requests down to 2! Wow! This is a dramatic improvement in concurrency as well as transaction latency. The lesson from this exercise was that if you can identify the common scenario and optimize for that case so that only the uncommon scenarios are more expensive, you can make dramatic improvements in performance without sacrificing correctness. So how does this relate to the architecture and design of some of the modern NoSQL systems? NoSQL systems can be broadly classified as master-slave sharded, or peer-to-peer sharded systems. NoSQL systems with a peer-to-peer architecture have an interesting way of handling changes. Whenever an item is changed, the client (or an intermediary) propagates the changes synchronously or asynchronously to multiple copies (for availability) of the data. Since the change can be propagated asynchronously, during some interval in time, it will be the case that some copies have received the update, and others haven’t. What happens if someone tries to read the item during this interval? The client in a peer-to-peer system will fetch the same item from multiple copies and compare them to each other. If they’re all the same, then every copy that was queried has the same (and up-to-date) value of the data item, so all’s good. If not, then the system provides a mechanism to reconcile the discrepancy and to update stale copies. So what’s the problem with this? There are two major issues: First, IT’S HORRIBLY PESSIMISTIC because, in the common case, it is unlikely that the same data item will be updated and read from different locations at around the same time! For every read operation, you have to read from multiple copies. That’s a pretty expensive, especially if the data are stored in multiple geographically separate locations and network latencies are high. Second, if the copies are not all the same, the application has to reconcile the differences and propagate the correct value to the out-dated copies. This means that the application program has to handle discrepancies in the different versions of the data item and resolve the issue (which can further add to cost and operation latency). Resolving discrepancies is only one part of the problem. What if the same data item was updated independently on two different nodes (copies)? In that case, due to the asynchronous nature of change propagation, you might land up with different versions of the data item in different copies. In this case, the application program also has to resolve conflicts and then propagate the correct value to the copies that are out-dated or have incorrect versions. This can get really complicated. My hunch is that there are many peer-to-peer-based applications that don’t handle this correctly, and worse, don’t even know it. Imagine have 100s of millions of records in your database – how can you tell whether a particular data item is incorrect or out of date? And what price are you willing to pay for ensuring that the data can be trusted? Multiple network messages per read request? Discrepancy and conflict resolution logic in the application, and potentially, additional messages? All this overhead, when all you were trying to do was to read a data item. Wouldn’t it be simpler to avoid this problem in the first place? Master-slave architectures like the Oracle NoSQL Database handles this very elegantly. A change to a data item is always sent to the master copy. Consequently, the master copy always has the most current and authoritative version of the data item. The master is also responsible for propagating the change to the other copies (for availability and read scalability). Client drivers are aware of master copies and replicas, and client drivers are also aware of the “currency” of a replica. In other words, each NoSQL Database client knows how stale a replica is. This vastly simplifies the job of the application developer. If the application needs the most current version of the data item, the client driver will automatically route the request to the master copy. If the application is willing to tolerate some staleness of data (e.g. a version that is no more than 1 second out of date), the client can easily determine which replica (or set of replicas) can satisfy the request, and route the request to the most efficient copy. This results in a dramatic simplification in application logic and also minimizes network requests (the driver will only send the request to exactl the right replica, not many). So, back to my original point. A well designed and well architected system minimizes or eliminates unnecessary overhead and avoids pessimistic algorithms wherever possible in order to deliver a highly efficient and high performance system. If you’ve every programmed an Oracle NoSQL Database application, you’ll know the difference! /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

  Read the article

• Peer Presure Badge [closed]

  - by Lizard

  I have just been going through the bandges you can get and noticed the peer pressure badge, I can't image ever asking a serious question that would get me 3 down votes. So I figured I would simply ask for the down votes myself... Please downvote this question, thanks. Blame the competitive side of me for wanting all the badges! Thanks

  Read the article

• GKPeerStateAvailable for non existing peers?

  - by Ernest

  Hi, used this website for the long time to find answers, now need to ask on myself! :) I have implemented multi player for my game using GKSession and client/server approach, not using peer picker (up to 4 player allowed). I have one big problem which I can't find solution for. If you disconnect/reconnect server peer quickly enough, client peer will "remember" that host and will show it in the list of all available peers permanently, only turning wifi/bluetooth off resets this. So if I do this 5 times in a row, my client will show 5 available hosts with the same name! Anyone had experience with this? Any idea of workarounds? I should note that requirements for my game is iPhone SDK 3.0 for Bluetooth and 3.1 for Wifi as GKSession supports both now.

  Read the article

• GKTank example is not working.

  - by david

  Hello, I'm trying to get the GKTank example working with 2 iPhones. Both have bluetooth enabled. I start the app on both devices and tap the screen. The Peer Picker comes up and the devices find each other. If I select one device in the list it says "Waiting for {other iPhone}..." forever. On the {other iPhone} the waiting phone gets grayed out. If I select the device to connect to from both devices at the same time both go into waiting state forever... The debug log says this if I select the other iPhone on the debugged device: 2010-05-30 23:20:24.331 GKTank[2433:4e03] handleEvents started (2) 2010-05-30 23:20:25.269 GKTank[2433:4e03] ~ DNSServiceRegister callback: Ref=135f70, Flags=2, ErrorType=0 name=00oRWv-0A..David’s iPhone regtype=_gktank._udp. domain=local. 2010-05-30 23:20:25.375 GKTank[2433:4e03] ~ DNSServiceBrowse callback: Ref=134f30, Flags=2, IFIndex=8 (name=[en2]), ErrorType=0 name=00oRWv-0A..David’s iPhone regtype=_gktank._udp. domain=local. 2010-05-30 23:20:30.691 GKTank[2433:4e03] ~ DNSServiceBrowse callback: Ref=134f30, Flags=2, IFIndex=-3 (name=[]), ErrorType=0 name=00K83eS0A..iPhone von Tamara regtype=_gktank._udp. domain=local. 2010-05-30 23:20:30.855 GKTank[2433:4e03] ~ DNSServiceQueryRecord callback: Ref=13a320, Flags=2, IFIndex=-3 (name=[]), ErrorType=0 fullname=00k83es0a..iphone\032von\032tamara._gktank._udp.local. rrtype=16 rrclass=1 rdlen=18 ttl=7200 2010-05-30 23:20:30.872 GKTank[2433:4e03] ** peer 480260628: oldbusy=0, newbusy=0 2010-05-30 23:20:35.215 GKTank[2433:207] ** Stop resolving? potentially previous resolves 2010-05-30 23:20:35.226 GKTank[2433:207] **** BEGIN RESOLVE: 480260628 and it stays that way. On the second iPhone the device is listed as not available and grayed out. If I select each other at the same time it says this: 2010-05-30 23:24:31.416 GKTank[2442:4e03] handleEvents started (2) 2010-05-30 23:24:32.321 GKTank[2442:4e03] ~ DNSServiceRegister callback: Ref=135120, Flags=2, ErrorType=0 name=006JiAZ0A..David’s iPhone regtype=_gktank._udp. domain=local. 2010-05-30 23:24:32.419 GKTank[2442:4e03] ~ DNSServiceBrowse callback: Ref=134f30, Flags=2, IFIndex=8 (name=[en2]), ErrorType=0 name=006JiAZ0A..David’s iPhone regtype=_gktank._udp. domain=local. 2010-05-30 23:24:57.156 GKTank[2442:4e03] ~ DNSServiceBrowse callback: Ref=134f30, Flags=2, IFIndex=-3 (name=[]), ErrorType=0 name=004_n6C0A..iPhone von Tamara regtype=_gktank._udp. domain=local. 2010-05-30 23:24:57.308 GKTank[2442:4e03] ~ DNSServiceQueryRecord callback: Ref=13a320, Flags=2, IFIndex=-3 (name=[]), ErrorType=0 fullname=004_n6c0a..iphone\032von\032tamara._gktank._udp.local. rrtype=16 rrclass=1 rdlen=18 ttl=7200 2010-05-30 23:24:57.314 GKTank[2442:4e03] ** peer 203104196: oldbusy=0, newbusy=0 2010-05-30 23:25:02.383 GKTank[2442:207] ** Stop resolving? potentially previous resolves 2010-05-30 23:25:02.425 GKTank[2442:207] **** BEGIN RESOLVE: 203104196 2010-05-30 23:25:13.562 GKTank[2442:4e03] ~ DNSServiceQueryRecord callback: Ref=13a320, Flags=2, IFIndex=-3 (name=[]), ErrorType=0 fullname=004_n6c0a..iphone\032von\032tamara._gktank._udp.local. rrtype=16 rrclass=1 rdlen=18 ttl=7200 2010-05-30 23:25:13.569 GKTank[2442:4e03] ** peer 203104196: oldbusy=0, newbusy=1 2010-05-30 23:25:33.660 GKTank[2442:4e03] ~ DNSServiceBrowse callback: Ref=134f30, Flags=0, IFIndex=-3 (name=[]), ErrorType=0 name=004_n6C0A..iPhone von Tamara regtype=_gktank._udp. domain=local. 2010-05-30 23:25:33.671 GKTank[2442:4e03] Peer [203104196] removed? (0). 2010-05-30 23:25:33.683 GKTank[2442:4e03] GKPeer[139f10] 203104196 service count old=1 new=0 2010-05-30 23:25:37.786 GKTank[2442:4e03] ~ DNSServiceBrowse callback: Ref=134f30, Flags=2, IFIndex=-3 (name=[]), ErrorType=0 name=004_n6C0A..iPhone von Tamara regtype=_gktank._udp. domain=local. 2010-05-30 23:25:37.816 GKTank[2442:4e03] GKPeer[139f10] 203104196 service count old=0 new=1 ... and waits forever. Does anybody know whats wrong with this sample??

  Read the article

• Network communication across two private network

  - by Sethu

  Hi All, I am trying to implement a peer to peer communication .. I use sockets for communication between them. I want to know if there are any ways i can use the same sort of communication when the two peers are behind two private Networks (They dont know each others public ip address.) I can think of a shared buffer in a well known location as a means of communication. But is there some other way to get this done?

  Read the article

• Broadcast-style Bluetooth using Sockets on the iPhone?

  - by Kyle

  Is there any way to open a broadcast bluetooth socket, take a listen and send replies? I want a proper peer to peer system where I broadcast and listen for broadcasts in an area. That way, variable clients can mingle. Is this possible? My theory is this: If GameKit can sit around wasting 25 seconds of the users time whilst having access to a broadcast socket, can't I? Or, must I be in kernel mode for such access? I'm not really sure where the proper bluetooth headers are as well. Thanks for reading!

  Read the article

• Is it posible to Build & Run on TWO iPhones/iPods at once?

  - by Dimitris

  When I connect two iPhones at the same time to my computer and Build and Run a project the app only installs and plays on one of the devices. Now, with the iPhone 3.0, that supports bluetooth peer-to-peer connectivity, to test a multiplayer project you have to install and run it on two devices at the same time. It would be very helpful to be able to do that with one click instead of: install on one phone, disconnect, connect the other, wait a 10 seconds to recognize the phone and install again and run... Is anyone aware of a method to do such a thing? Thanks

  Read the article

• Help with making a C# P2P Chat Program

  - by Sandeep Bansal

  Hi everyone, I want to make a P2P Chat client, all I want it to do is to be able to send text across to each peer. I looked at a Chat Client from this example: http://www.geekpedia.com/tutorial239_Csharp-Chat-Part-1---Building-the-Chat-Client.html And am wondering if it can be converted to a p2p program? If so how can it be and can someone provide some code as it will help a lot. If it can't how can I make a really simple p2p chat program? Codes and examples will be very helpful. btw I did look at this article, but it didn't help me: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms751502.aspx

  Read the article

• Talking with a Bittorrent client listening on a port?

  - by Legend

  I have one of my computers seeding a torrent file on port 45000. I am trying to write a small client in python (or perhaps perl) that helps me to determine the types of messages this client supports for which I need to perhaps do a handshake with the client. In Azureus, this is done using a call like peer.getSupportedMessages(). Is it possible to do this using some library in python or perl? An example of the returned messages would look like this: BT_KEEP_ALIVE BT_PIECE BT_REQUEST BT_UNCHOKE BT_UNINTERESTED BT_SUGGEST_PIECE BT_HAVE_ALL BT_HAVE_NONE BT_REJECT_REQUEST BT_ALLOWED_FAST BT_LT_EXT_MESSAGE BT_DHT_PORT lt_handshake ut_pex

  Read the article

• Peer code review for full application

  - by bswinnerton

  My sincerest apologies if this is the wrong place to post something like this, but this seemed like the best fit. I was wondering if there are any websites or resources for a full site peer code review. I'm new to Ruby specifically and want to make sure that my logic is following the overall best standards. I've pieced together multiple different tutorials and I feel like while my understanding is getting better, it'd be great if the overall structure of such an application could be critiqued, and for someone that doesn't really know another Ruby developer - I find that I've run into a roadblock and don't want to develop bad habits now.

  Read the article

• sshfs with fstab: connection reset by peer

  - by user171348

  I am trying to allow my laptop (Ubuntu 13.04) to access my PC (Lubuntu 13.04) hard drive through SSHFS. I'm using RSA keys to connect. It works perfectly fine if I type this in the terminal: sshfs my-PC:/a_folder /media/a_folder But I would like it to be mounted automatically when I boot my laptop. So I added myself to the fuse group: sudo adduser mynickname fuse And I added the following line to my fstab file: sshfs#mynickname@my-PC:/a_folder /media/a_folder fuse defaults,idmap=user,_netdev 0 0 When I boot the laptop, a_folder appears in the list of devices, but is not mounted. When I try to access it through Nautilus, it displays the following error: mount: only root can mount sshfs#mynickname@my-PC:/a_folder on /media/a_folder I get the same error if I try mount /media/a_folder in a terminal. If I try sudo mount /media/a_folder I get read: Connection reset by peer I tried to add "allow_other" as an option in the fstab entry, and uncommented the related line in /etc/fuse.conf, but it didn't change anything. The user "mynickname" is the owner of the folder /media/a_folder and has rwx permissions. I looked at many threads on the internet about people with quite similar issues, but nothing worked so far. Usually, people can't even do sshfs my-PC:/a_folder /media/a_folder without getting an error, whereas this works fine on my laptop. Any insight and tips will be greatly appreciated! Thanks.

  Read the article

• What are benefit/drawbacks of classifying defects during a peer code review

  - by DXM

  About 3 months ago, our engineering group rolled out Review Board to be used for all peer code reviews. Today, I had a discussion with one of the people involved in that process and found out that we are already looking for a replacement (possibly something commercial) because of several missing features. One of the features that is apparently asked by many people is the ability to classify/categorize each code review comment (i.e. is it a style issue, coding convention, resource leak, logic error, crash... whatever). For those teams that regularly practice code review, is this categorization a common practice? Do you do it? have you done it in the past? Is it good/bad? On one hand, it gives the team some more metrics and possibly will indicate more specific areas where developers may potentially need to be trained in (at least that seems to be the argument). Are there other benefits? And on the other hand, and this is my concern, is that it will slow down code review process that much more. As a team lead, I've done a fairly large share of reviews, and I've always liked the ability, to highlight a chunk of code, hammer off a comment and move on as fast as possible. Although I haven't tried it personally, I have a feeling that expanding that combo box every time and scrolling/searching for the right category would feel like something is tripping you. Also if we start keeping metrics on this stuff, my other concern is that valuable code review meeting time will be spent on arguing whether something is a logic error or if it should be classified as a crash.

  Read the article

• SSH problems (ssh_exchange_identification: read: Connection reset by peer)

  - by kSiR

  I was running 11.10 and decided to do the full upgrade and come up to 12.04 after the update SSH (not SSHD) is now misbehaving when attempting to connect to other OpenSSH instances. I say OpenSSH as I am running a DropBear sshd on my router and I am able to connect to it. When attempting to connect to an OpenSSH server risk@skynet:~/.ssh$ ssh -vvv risk@someserver OpenSSH_5.9p1 Debian-5ubuntu1, OpenSSL 1.0.1 14 Mar 2012 debug1: Reading configuration data /home/risk/.ssh/config debug3: key names ok: [[email protected],[email protected],[email protected],[email protected],ecdsa-sha2-nistp256,ecdsa-sha2-nistp384,ecdsa-sha2-nistp521,ssh-rsa,ssh-dss] debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config debug1: /etc/ssh/ssh_config line 19: Applying options for * debug2: ssh_connect: needpriv 0 debug1: Connecting to someserver [someserver] port 22. debug1: Connection established. debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_rsa type -1 debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_rsa-cert type -1 debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_dsa type -1 debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_dsa-cert type -1 debug3: Incorrect RSA1 identifier debug3: Could not load "/home/risk/.ssh/id_ecdsa" as a RSA1 public key debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_ecdsa type 3 debug1: Checking blacklist file /usr/share/ssh/blacklist.ECDSA-521 debug1: Checking blacklist file /etc/ssh/blacklist.ECDSA-521 debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_ecdsa-cert type -1 ssh_exchange_identification: read: Connection reset by peer risk@skynet:~/.ssh$ DropBear instance risk@skynet:~/.ssh$ ssh -vvv root@darkness OpenSSH_5.9p1 Debian-5ubuntu1, OpenSSL 1.0.1 14 Mar 2012 debug1: Reading configuration data /home/risk/.ssh/config debug3: key names ok: [[email protected],[email protected],[email protected],[email protected],ecdsa-sha2-nistp256,ecdsa-sha2-nistp384,ecdsa-sha2-nistp521,ssh-rsa,ssh-dss] debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config debug1: /etc/ssh/ssh_config line 19: Applying options for * debug2: ssh_connect: needpriv 0 debug1: Connecting to darkness [192.168.1.1] port 22. debug1: Connection established. debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_rsa type -1 debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_rsa-cert type -1 debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_dsa type -1 debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_dsa-cert type -1 debug3: Incorrect RSA1 identifier debug3: Could not load "/home/risk/.ssh/id_ecdsa" as a RSA1 public key debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_ecdsa type 3 debug1: Checking blacklist file /usr/share/ssh/blacklist.ECDSA-521 debug1: Checking blacklist file /etc/ssh/blacklist.ECDSA-521 debug1: identity file /home/risk/.ssh/id_ecdsa-cert type -1 debug1: Remote protocol version 2.0, remote software version dropbear_0.52 debug1: no match: dropbear_0.52 ... I have googled and ran most ALL fixes recommend both from the Debian and Arch sides and none of them seem to resolve my issue. Any ideas?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >