isalsowrong

They are not! The only case an ext3 filesystem contains a .journal file is when a mounted ext2 filesystem is upgraded to ext3 using tune2fs. If you create an ext3 filesystem directly (as has been done well over a decade) or e2fsck an upgraded ext2 filesystem, the journal is attached to an invisible reserved inode. In other words, modern ext3/ext4 does not have a visible .journal file. And even when it had, it was always in the root (/) directory. I also have .journal files in my BTSync application directory, and they are clearly generated by Bittorrent Sync: % tail -n2 <some long ID>.journal[20150408 21:55:08.172] insert file "/Users/xyz/BitTorrent Sync/Photos ABC/201502-201504" = 16777220:10449049[20150408 21:55:08.172] insert file "/Users/xyz/BitTorrent Sync/Photos ABC/201502-201504/XYZ" = 16777220:10449050(Directory names are anonimized a bit.) This is extremely bad advise, for any readers don't do this! Disabling the journal will mean that it will be much harder to recover a filesystem from a crash or power interruption. When your computer is started, the journal is replayed such that any metadata writes that were not completed can be completed successfully. Without a journal, your filesystem can be left in an inconsistent state in the event of a crash, because it might have been in the middle of a write.

Not sure if this is helpful, but I was able to debug some problems by turning on debug logging (it's in the advanced preferences), and then monitoring the debug.log file in (IIRC) the configured 'storage_path' directory.

There are three states a 2.0 folder can be in: Disconnected: the folder is not synced.Connected with sync all: the folder is synced completely.Connected without sync all: the folder's directory structure is synced and populated by placeholders (ending with .bts). Double clicking a placeholder will sync the file and open it. It's also possible to e.g. in the Mac Finder or Windows explorer select multiple placeholders or a directory and sync it. This state is comparable to 'selective sync' in some other products.A connected folder with sync all resembles 1.4 the most. Also not that you can still create 1.4-style shares by holding the Shift key while pressing the 'Add folder' button.

You are too paranoid. The IPs are from the 52/11 subnet, which is owned by Amazon. However, if you look up the hostname of one of the IPs: % host 52.0.102.230230.102.0.52.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer ec2-52-0-102-230.compute-1.amazonaws.com.you'll see that these are just Amazon EC2 hosts. In other words, Bittorrent Sync's infrastructure (trackers, etc.) is running on the EC2 cloud, like a gazillion other web services. No 'probing packets'. Is 'Sync All' enabled for the folder on the peer that does not start syncing? I think this is what you typically see when a peer is connected, but doesn't have 'Sync All' enabled (just selective sync). You can find out by looking at the folder details on the peer.

Luckily, you can set them to be disconnected or connected with selective sync. So, it's not such a serious problem in practice. It's nice that you can see all the folders that you shared and enable them at will. If you disconnect a folder, it's not on the system anymore. One downside of the new system is that it's currently not possible to sync read-only on some devices and read-write on others. E.g. on my Android phone I deleted some photos from the Android gallery (it's handy that it can show photos from shares in the gallery, but I didn't realize that those specific photos were from a BTSync share) and then they were gone from all peers. I'd like to be able to set some devices to read-only to avoid accidents. Of course, it's still possible to create 1.4 folders as well that do have these properties. However, it's not all bad. Identities also come with upsides. E.g. I have a Raspberry Pi configured with Sync 2.0 set to 'Sync All'. This means that if I create a new share on e.g. my laptop, the Pi automatically becomes a syncing peer. Another advantage is that you can change access rights to shares. E.g. if you're collecting some photo's with family, you can give them read-write access first, and then ensure that everything is preserved by changing access rights to read-only. But if it didn't work like that, you could easily play the system by just enabling/disabling shares. Though, I think it is a bad limitation, because 2.0 would have been far more popular and well-received without the limit (keeping the features of 1.4 in tact). Serious users will want selective sync and the new sharing options anyway.

This one post per day limit is really annoying (and apparently, doesn't really help shutting out spammers). That is how it works. Say you have two nodes that are associated to your identity, but are behind (different) firewalls doing NAT where: - There is no port forwarding set up. - uPnP is not possible. there is no way for the nodes to contact each other directly (there are other situations, such as some VPNs and DS-Lite, where relaying can kick in). Also, a thing such as: would not solve such problems. Most firewalls are set up to use connection tracking and will only allow incoming packets from associated with connection that was established from the inside to the outside. Behind such a firewall, it is by definition *not* possible for the nodes to contact each other directly. Also, if NAT is used, the node is not addressable from the outside (which is exactly the reason you needed port forwarding in the first place). The relay servers are provided for such cases. Both nodes contact the relay server (a connection initiated explicitly by the BTSync client). Say that node A contains new changes compared to node B, then node A will send the (encrypted) data to the relay server, the relay server will send the encrypted data to node B. But all packets physically go through the relay server, and this incurs bandwidth costs. This situation is pretty common. E.g. in Germany, many household connections use IPv6, and IPv4 is tunneled using DS-Lite (meaning that many consumers share one IPv4 address, ergo no port forwarding for IPv4). I have such a connection at home. At the same time, my employer blocks all incoming connections (except those permitted through session tracking). This means that when I am at work, I use a relay server (I can see this by the icon in the list of peers). Everything that is synced when I am at work, goes through Bittorrent Sync's relay servers. If you don't believe me and want it from the horse's mouth, here you have it: http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/34509-use-over-internet-without-relay-server/?p=101168 (Of course, this does not apply when direct peer to peer connections can be established, such as on a local network or when port forwarding can be set up on one of the two ends.)