01:04 <cr1901_modern> rjo (I think this was you who told me about this): How painful is it to get real USD out of bitcoin in 2017?

01:20 <sb0> why are all those smoltcp contributors not fixing those bugs that affect artiq? is it the same super-frustrating situation as lwIP where it works for hundreds of people but is miserable for us?

01:22 <whitequark> um, because I'm working on the ARP bug...

04:35 <GitHub158> [smoltcp] pothos commented on pull request #65 40133c9: The overflow assertions are fixed in the other commit with an extra test: https://github.com/m-labs/smoltcp/pull/65/commits/3480238359d1d26c7c570af471073049ade002b9 (but are not shown by github anymore since the master merge).... https://github.com/m-labs/smoltcp/pull/65#discussion_r150735623

04:45 <GitHub58> [smoltcp] pothos commented on pull request #65 40133c9: Ah, now saw the picked commit, thanks. https://github.com/m-labs/smoltcp/pull/65#discussion_r150736514

04:47 <GitHub59> [smoltcp] dlrobertson opened issue #81: IpEndpoint should have a FromStr implementation https://github.com/m-labs/smoltcp/issues/81

06:23 <sb0> _florent_, did you look at ethernet on sayma

06:23 <sb0> ?

07:28 <GitHub125> [smoltcp] pothos commented on pull request #65 d51f854: Expanded the test coverage for normal transmission where remote_last_seq should not be touched. https://github.com/m-labs/smoltcp/pull/65#discussion_r150754266

08:28 <rjo> cr1901_modern: no idea about now. i haven't done that in years. my hunch would be that private sale is be best.

08:30 <rjo> sb0: that might be because we are still the lead adopter and there is still significant hype contribution with the others.

08:43 <_florent_> sb0: no, haven't gived another look at ethernet, i'll do once serwb issue will be fixed

10:27 <GitHub84> [artiq] cjbe opened issue #849: Core device panics (infrequently) on loading kernel function https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/issues/849

11:02 <GitHub138> [artiq] sbourdeauducq commented on issue #849: Can we get the device to print backtraces on panic? https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/issues/849#issuecomment-344223480

13:00 <GitHub193> [artiq] whitequark commented on issue #849: Yes. But this is likely not necessary in this particular case.... https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/issues/849#issuecomment-344251722

13:01 <GitHub197> [artiq] sbourdeauducq commented on issue #849: How do you know this is in the TCP stack? https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/issues/849#issuecomment-344252046

13:08 <GitHub174> [artiq] whitequark commented on issue #849: I don't *know*, but that's where almost all of the slicing lives; most of the rest is in the RPC code and we haven't touched that. https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/issues/849#issuecomment-344253689

15:24 <GitHub157> [smoltcp] batonius commented on issue #55: > we should have a LoopbackInterface... https://github.com/m-labs/smoltcp/issues/55#issuecomment-344293365

22:03 <GitHub112> [smoltcp] dhslichter commented on issue #68: @whitequark what is the timeline for fixing this issue? This is a high priority for us because we can't use ARTIQ 3 on our network until it is addressed (the ARP storm breaks some other groups' stuff), and I think other labs may be in a similar position. https://github.com/m-labs/smoltcp/issues/68#issuecomment-344414317

22:16 <GitHub6> [sinara] marmeladapk pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/m-labs/sinara/commit/07bb125e6b2d22643ca9e19e7287053d1e751563

22:16 <GitHub6> sinara/master 07bb125 marmeladapk: Kasli updated power budget...