I2P support forum

Hi there.
I've found many tryers face slow speeds with the i2p network, so am I.
So, I was banging i2p router out for speed and ended up setting up 16 tunnels quantities through the config files.
Now I enjoy smooth and consistent i2p experience, my CPU enjoy computation...
But how is it for i2p network? Don't I harm it? Won't another routers hate me?
I'm asking becase there was no legitimate way to set such numbers through the web console
and it starts screaming about high quantities long before 16.

EXPLORATORY TUNNELS
Inbound & Outbound
Length: 3 hops
Randomization: 1 hop
Quantity: 16 tunnels
Backup quantity: 8 tunnels

CLIENT TUNNELS FOR SHARED CLIENTS
Inbound
Length: 3 hops
Randomization: 1 hop
Quantity: 16 tunnels
Backup quantity: 8 tunnels
Outbound
Length: 3 hops
Randomization: 1 hop
Quantity: 8 tunnels
Backup quantity: 4 tunnels

Tunnels
Exploratory: 65
Client: 56

I'd say that's a bit too much. (especially "backup tunnels" but i personally don't use them, not sure if they have any big benefit)

Have you tried less tunnels? Have you tried comparing them?

For exploratory tunnels, the defaults should be left as is, I think.
(they are not used for active browsing, only for background network exploration)

Also, more tunnels doesn't automatically mean more speed (afaik 1 http stream/connection to 1 destination tries to use a single tunnel for stability, so that the packet latency stays somewhat the same and it doesn't have to do too much packet reordering)

Are you sure you need tunnel length randomization?

On another forum there was a discussion around tunnel length and probability of deanon. You might find that interesting. See here: http://discuss.i2p/viewtopic.php?t=115.

Ah, I didn't come up with this quantity (16) myself; found it on: http://i2p-projekt.i2p/en/docs/protocol/i2cp that it's the max quantity for inbound (outbound is unlimited btw, guess this meant for hosting).
There: http://i2p-projekt.i2p/en/docs/tunnels/implementation is also a statement that:
"I2P is an inherently packet switched network, even with these tunnels, allowing it to take advantage of multiple tunnels running in parallel, increasing resilience and balancing load."
And there (WARNING, CLEARNET LINK!): https://www.reddit.com/r/i2p/comments/8 ... _quantity/ is a comment by r/i2p moderator – alreadyburnt:
"More tunnels will mean higher bandwidth and reliability for most cases, it just might not be necessary for all cases. Technically, tunnel quantity can go anywhere from 1 to 16, and in very busy or interactive connections where there is unused bandwidth, higher will generally be better. Torrenting will probably benefit in terms of performance."

So, I had concluded that i2p router effectively parallelize transferring data among its many relatively slow tunnels thus raising resulting performance.
Excited, I ran in to i2p router settings just to discover that here I only can set 6... temporarily... and there is permanent settings where I only can set 3... of said 16 There was a note saying that exploratory tunnels settings stored in some config file, so you know where it went next
After your post I was observing usage of tunnels while surfing through... and it really doesn't seem to parallelize much: very few tunnels have changed their value with I can clearly point just one tunnel which is main. It seems that speed of a single tunnel was actually enough for eepsites, and the only thing I was benefiting from was redundancy of this many tunnels. Guess just over time my router found faster peers.
I set 3 tunnels to start with and went surfing: inconsistence wasn't long in coming. I figured out that I lost fast tunnel and the remaining and newbuilt are not impressive. So, I started to gradually raise the quantity, test, and the number I came to is: 5
Author of i2pd definitely knew something! (joking, obviously he know much, he coding damn router)
Quantity of 6 in java router seems fairly fail safe. And quantities higher than that seems to lead to waste... in surfing – torrenting still flourish more the more it provided with. There I'll keep the 16/16. Without backup tunnels, didn't determined their usefullness so far, and I suppose torrenting is not the thing that actually needs to quickly replace closing tunnels.

That said, don't you think that i2p can benefit greatly (more than potential overhead and additional processing drawbacks) by effectively parallelizing its transfers, if not by packets then by requests, like: html goes one tunnel, css to another, and every image goes its own separate tunnel?

Hi

you can set up to 16 tunnels per destination in config file.
But I2P will use only 1 tunnel per connection. AKA: if you e.g. use ftp with a single connection, it will only use 1, even if 16 are available,
Or with torrent: if you got 16 active tunnels, but only 1 seed, it will use only 1 tunnel.

BUT if you have 16 seeds, they may use all 16 tunnels.

On downside: each tunnel does cost some ressources, you need to find the sweet spot for your service on your own.

Another point: you may also use 2 destinations or multihoming for one service, which double the max tunnels, or even more...

echelon