3 ms·

> federation issues > gazillion TCP connections We’ve been running a Synapse server with quite a bit of federated rooms, even larger ones like you mention. Ne

by 3np 5y ago

> federation issues > gazillion TCP connections We’ve been running a Synapse server with quite a bit of federated rooms, even larger ones like you mention. Never noticed a single issue like this that I recall. I wonder if the reason is that we’re doing whitelisting, instead of federation with everyone by default. The whitelisting is quite liberal; I’ll add a server as soon as I’m in a conversation thread with someone from that server, or just want to see their avatar. Sometimes when I’m waiting for something else I’ll just scroll through a room and add a handful of servers. Essentially this is my proxy for only federation with “legit” servers and avoid being DDoSed. > there should be a server wide option to make it "easier but less secure" Disagree. Sure, UX can be improved, but compromising here defeats the purpose of why we’re doing this in the first place. Another one of mine: - E2EE seems complex to implement and very few of the clients implement it fully and properly. This is the one point I think needs to be resolved before Matrix can be ready for wider adoption. It’s kind of pointless without E2EE, or if Element is the only client that can work for all rooms and messages.

kuon 5y ago
I didn't whitelist anything, maybe that was a source for issue. > Disagree. Sure, UX can be improved, but compromising here defeats the purpose of why we’re doing this in the first place. The thing is, as I ran my own server in my office, SSL (with no E2E) is already a good privacy. And even with that setup, the server users got "harassed" by the UI asking them to sync devices keys. For many users, a single prompt about security is enough to discourage them.
- CameronNemo 5y ago
  So you are asking for a client setting (in Element I presume) to stop nudging users to set up e2ee? Did you file an issue for that?
  - kuon 5y ago
    If I try again to "convert" non technical people around me, I'll try to document properly what is wrong in the UX and experience. (but maybe it will all be fixed)
- 3np 5y ago
  > And even with that setup, the server users got "harassed" by the UI asking them to sync devices keys. I think Element is the only client doing this. So if you don’t care about E2EE, there are several options. My point is, this is something that should be addressed in the client UX, not on the server- or protocol level.
- 3np 5y ago
  > I didn't whitelist anything, maybe that was a source for issue. Should have mentioned: I think my approach works fine for single-user or small-closed-community servers. Nobody should do this on servers with public rooms and/or open registration as it will lock out minority servers and cause further centralization.

by 3np 5y ago

kuon 5y ago

I didn't whitelist anything, maybe that was a source for issue. > Disagree. Sure, UX can be improved, but compromising here defeats the purpose of why we’re doing this in the first place. The thing is, as I ran my own server in my office, SSL (with no E2E) is already a good privacy. And even with that setup, the server users got "harassed" by the UI asking them to sync devices keys. For many users, a single prompt about security is enough to discourage them.

CameronNemo 5y ago
So you are asking for a client setting (in Element I presume) to stop nudging users to set up e2ee? Did you file an issue for that?
- kuon 5y ago
  If I try again to "convert" non technical people around me, I'll try to document properly what is wrong in the UX and experience. (but maybe it will all be fixed)
3np 5y ago
> And even with that setup, the server users got "harassed" by the UI asking them to sync devices keys. I think Element is the only client doing this. So if you don’t care about E2EE, there are several options. My point is, this is something that should be addressed in the client UX, not on the server- or protocol level.
3np 5y ago
> I didn't whitelist anything, maybe that was a source for issue. Should have mentioned: I think my approach works fine for single-user or small-closed-community servers. Nobody should do this on servers with public rooms and/or open registration as it will lock out minority servers and cause further centralization.