Forum "Who's Online" is broken

[#1]

Probably, @Townman - but that is normal, I am permanently online according to the avatar top right, even when I don't show in the online list? Go figure!

[#2]

@NickBS 

So, I have found that after around 4 minutes the connection to community.plus.net is dropped.

For windows 10 and 11 "TCPview" application, for Mint cli command

"netstat watch -ant"

tcp 0 0 192.168.10.247:36070 18.244.114.7:443 ESTABLISHED

after around 4 minute

tcp 0 0 192.168.10.247:36070 18.244.114.7:443 TIME_WAIT

With both (TCPView and the cli command) I note after around 4 minutes the connection from being "ESTABLISHED" to "TIME_WAIT", refresh will re-establish the connection, I was not logged out of the account during this period.

tcp 0 0 192.168.10.247:53798    18.244.114.49:443  ESTABLISHED

NOTE: the browser has connected to a different server, was 18.244.114.7 now 18.244.114.49

Whilst I was posting this thread I was not listed in Users Online.

EDIT: I was only viewing the home page during this period, not navigating though the site.

[#3]

@Dan_the_Van 

Thanks for that deep technical dig ... which somewhat gives credence to there being an inter-service-instance issue here.

[#4]

---

@greygit1 wrote:

Dropping the IP level connection did/does, however clear the problem. IMO

---

@Townman 

Today was my first opportunity to check, it was this post that prompted me to look a bit further down the ISO layers, below 7 Application.

[#5]

A further observation - which may or may not help - even if a Community member is online, if they do not appear in the 'Who's online' list, their status displays 'offline'. Something strange is going off, either intentionally or otherwise.

[#6]

Thinking about my post above - someone has altered basic code -not @jaread83 's  modifications - in the program to cause this. WHY?

[#7]

@NickBS  any action on this - you/Khorus have now been given a lot of data, but we have no responses?

[#8]

Blundering off-topic...

I am of the opinion that there's more going on "under the bonnet" than we'll ever see (without access to/visibility of internal systems). Routing/switching of network traffic via differing physical paths can expose minor inconsistencies.

Heck, I've seen two identical unix boxes with what had the same reported hardware, software and firmware report differing 'ping' responses over what appeared to be the same physical path (using tracert - ICMP - and traceroute - UDP).

Analysing the physical distance (as the crow flies, so to speak, without taking into account that the physical path may very likely be longer) between the endpoints indicated that laws of physics may be being broken (i.e. we'd achieved faster-than-light travel).

At the time (since I could get no useful information from the provider of the connection(s)) I just had to go <shrug>. The admin of those unix systems still wanted standardised faster-than-light travel between the two servers.

Even for the one that obeyed basic physics.

That was over a decade ago.

[#9]

Since this was in a commercial environment I knew where both end points were located.

[#10]

partial screenshot at about 00:10

[#11]

Thanks for two pointless posts, and one which is a known 'issue'.

[#12]

Thx for your reply.

Elsewhere.

[#13]

That is dependent on the time period you choose - the default is 'last month', and that is what is displayed on the forum .

[#14]

I never knew there was a time period that could beseen via a click-through. It wasn't immediately obvious. You've obviously been working with this longer than I have, and I was obviously falsely assuming it was a cumulative number.

Are there any descriptions/documentation to prevent future similar mistakes?

[#15]

I have subsequently seen that I 'revisited' a previously reported manifestation of an underlying issue in the 'Forum "Who's Online" is broken'. Apologies