-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Relay Swarm #575
Comments
Idea: Maybe we're somehow gossiping relay observed relay addresses. So, this is what I originally thought was happening:
However, I no longer think this is happening. We only add the observed peer's address to our peerstore if the transports are consistent with an address they claim to be listening on. That means that, if they're listening on a relay, we may decide to advertise a different relay. However, that's not that big of an issue because we'll only do this if they're connected to us through that other relay (mostly). |
Idea: Maybe we're storing observed relay addrs. So, we are but we shouldn't ever be announcing them, at least in go-ipfs, because we filter out all relay addresses by default. The only ones we don't filter out are ones we explicitly choose in the autorelay host. Observation: Whyrusleeping noticed that some nodes are advertising many relays. Some nodes are also advertising relays + public addresses |
I think we are definitely gossiping observed relay addresses, quickly causing our address set to expand to all relays. |
This morning, we noticed a bunch of peers swarming and overloading our relays. We initially thought this might be malicious but, on further inspection, it looks like there were just some popular nodes running behind relays (causing a bunch of peers to connect to them).
However, we're still concerned some peers may be routing traffic through relays when they shouldn't be. This issue exists so we can report our findings as we investigate this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: