* close peer's connection to avoid fd leak
Fixes#2967
* rename peer#Addr to RemoteAddr
* fix test
* fixes after Ethan's review
* bring back the check
* changelog entry
* write a test for switch#acceptRoutine
* increase timeouts? :(
* remove extra assertNPeersWithTimeout
* simplify test
* assert number of peers (just to be safe)
* Cleanup in OnStop
* run tests with verbose flag on CircleCI
* spawn a reading routine to prevent connection from closing
* get port from the listener
random port is faster, but often results in
```
panic: listen tcp 127.0.0.1:44068: bind: address already in use [recovered]
panic: listen tcp 127.0.0.1:44068: bind: address already in use
goroutine 79 [running]:
testing.tRunner.func1(0xc0001bd600)
/usr/local/go/src/testing/testing.go:792 +0x387
panic(0x974d20, 0xc0001b0500)
/usr/local/go/src/runtime/panic.go:513 +0x1b9
github.com/tendermint/tendermint/p2p.MakeSwitch(0xc0000f42a0, 0x0, 0x9fb9cc, 0x9, 0x9fc346, 0xb, 0xb42128, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, ...)
/home/vagrant/go/src/github.com/tendermint/tendermint/p2p/test_util.go:182 +0xa28
github.com/tendermint/tendermint/p2p.MakeConnectedSwitches(0xc0000f42a0, 0x2, 0xb42128, 0xb41eb8, 0x4f1205, 0xc0001bed80, 0x4f16ed)
/home/vagrant/go/src/github.com/tendermint/tendermint/p2p/test_util.go:75 +0xf9
github.com/tendermint/tendermint/p2p.MakeSwitchPair(0xbb8d20, 0xc0001bd600, 0xb42128, 0x2f7, 0x4f16c0)
/home/vagrant/go/src/github.com/tendermint/tendermint/p2p/switch_test.go:94 +0x4c
github.com/tendermint/tendermint/p2p.TestSwitches(0xc0001bd600)
/home/vagrant/go/src/github.com/tendermint/tendermint/p2p/switch_test.go:117 +0x58
testing.tRunner(0xc0001bd600, 0xb42038)
/usr/local/go/src/testing/testing.go:827 +0xbf
created by testing.(*T).Run
/usr/local/go/src/testing/testing.go:878 +0x353
exit status 2
FAIL github.com/tendermint/tendermint/p2p 0.350s
```
* p2p: panic on transport error
Addresses #2823. Currently, the acceptRoutine exits if the transport returns
an error trying to accept a new connection. Once this happens, the node
can't accept any new connections. So here, we panic instead. While we
could potentially be more intelligent by rerunning the acceptRoutine, the
error may indicate something more fundamental (eg. file desriptor limit)
that requires a restart anyways. We can leave it to process managers to
handle that restart, and notify operators about the panic.
* changelog
* p2p: re-check after sleeps
* use NodeInfo as an interface
* Revert "use NodeInfo as an interface"
This reverts commit 5f7d055e6c.
* Revert "p2p: re-check after sleeps"
This reverts commit 7f41070da0.
* preserve dial to itself
* ignore ensured connections while re-connecting
* re-check after sleep
* keep protocol definition on net addresses
* decrease log level
* Revert "preserve dial to itself"
This reverts commit 0c6e0fc58d.
* correct func comment according to modification
Co-Authored-By: mgurevin <mehmet@gurevin.net>
* Require addressbook to only store addresses with valid ID
* Do not shut down peer immediately after sending pex addrs in SeedMode
* p2p: fix#2773
* seed mode: use go-routine to sleep before stopping peer
* p2p: NodeInfo is an interface
* (squash) fixes from review
* (squash) more fixes from review
* p2p: remove peerConn.HandshakeTimeout
* p2p: NodeInfo is two interfaces. Remove String()
* fixes from review
* remove test code from peer.RemoteIP()
* p2p: remove peer.OriginalAddr(). See #2618
* use a mockPeer in peer_set_test.go
* p2p: fix testNodeInfo naming
* p2p: remove unused var
* remove testRandNodeInfo
* fix linter
* fix retry dialing self
* fix rpc
We are swapping the exisiting listener implementation with the newly
introduced Transport and its default implementation MultiplexTransport,
removing a large chunk of old connection setup and handling scattered
over the Peer and Switch code. The Switch requires a Transport now and
handles externally passed Peer filters.
* ignore existing peers in DialPeersAsync
Fixes#2253
* rename HasPeerWithAddress to IsDialingOrExistingAddress
[breaking] remove Switch#IsDialing
* check if addrBook is nil
to be consistent with other usages of addrBook across Switch
* different log messages for 2 use-cases
* [p2p/pex] connect to more than 10 peers
also, remove DefaultMinNumOutboundPeers because a) I am not sure it's
needed b) it's super confusing
look closely
```
maxPeers := sw.config.MaxNumPeers - DefaultMinNumOutboundPeers
if maxPeers <= sw.peers.Size() {
sw.Logger.Info("Ignoring inbound connection: already have enough peers", "address", inConn.RemoteAddr().String(), "numPeers", sw.peers.Size(), "max", maxPeers)
```
we print maxPeers = config.MaxPeers - DefaultMinNumOutboundPeers. So we
may not have enough peers even though we say we have enough.
Refs #2130
* update spec
* replace MaxNumPeers with MaxNumInboundPeers/MaxNumOutboundPeers
Refs #2130
* update changelog
* make max rpc conns formula visible to users
* update spec
* docs: note max outbound peers excludes persistent
except now we calculate the max size using the maxPacketMsgSize()
function, which frees developers from having to know amino encoding
details.
plus, 10 additional bytes are added to leave the room for amino upgrades
(both making it more efficient / less efficient)
Instead of mutating the passed in MConnConfig part of P2PConfig we just
use the default and override the values, the same as before as it was
always the default version. This is yet another good reason to not embed
information and access to config structs in our components and will go
away with the ongoing refactoring in #1325.
As both configs are concerned with the p2p packaage and PeerConfig is
only used inside of the package there is no good reason to keep the
couple of fields separate, therefore it is collapsed into the more
general P2PConifg. This is a stepping stone towards a setup where the
components inside of p2p do not have any knowledge about the config.
follow-up to #1325
As we didn't hear any voices requesting this feature, we removed the
option to disable it and always have peer connection auth encrypted.
closes#1518
follow-up #1325
"this means if there are lookup errors or typos in the persistent_peers,
tendermint will fail to start ? didn't some one ask for us not to do
this previously ?"