ivarson Posted February 12, 2016 Report Share Posted February 12, 2016 My RPi seems dead which ive joined with my Pro license. in my other machines Sync UI, i see that i can "hide" my RPi, but not unlink it. Can i avoid that dead RPi (broken sd) alocating 1 of my 10 Pro licenswd devices? (and hanging around in my UI for no use)? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
vigilian Posted February 12, 2016 Report Share Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) Can we have a general option maybe to remove some devices to the general list of devices and so the subfolders devices list would also erase those names? Edited February 12, 2016 by vigilian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Helen Posted February 18, 2016 Report Share Posted February 18, 2016 ivarson, That 'dead' RPi is not taking 1 of 10 devices, cause it's dead. Yes, you can hide it from the list, and if you want to completely get rid of it, you'll need to unlink the current identity (where the RPi is marked as dead) from all local devices. vigilian, Unfortunately, remote unlinking (removing) of devices is not implemented, and is not planned for the near future. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aries Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 Hi I had to get rid of Sync on my mac and install new one twice. It share files with my home server. Now I see files with .btsz extension. Those files are no more, but Sync thinks it is on old mac instances which I can't unlink. I think we need some feature for it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Helen Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 @Aries Can you elaborate? .btsz cannot be a device, btsz stands for a file not yet synced. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aries Posted June 1, 2016 Report Share Posted June 1, 2016 Excuse me, I didn't say anything about any device. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Helen Posted June 2, 2016 Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 I mean those files once were not filly synced. Perhaps, when the Mac got rid of, those files were being synced? SO now the remaining peers have nowhere to download them. If there are peers in your mesh, which possess the file itself, here you can see tips on how to force and finish syncing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aries Posted June 2, 2016 Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 Helen, I don't need to finish sync these files, because I have them in different place. I just saw .btsz nulls from previous OS X installations on the same mac. it's like I saw ghosts I got rid of them by choose "Remove from all devices", but do it by hand is very inconvenient. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Helen Posted June 2, 2016 Report Share Posted June 2, 2016 Sorry, then only manually removing, or you can disconnect the folder from Sync and connect it back. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ivo.welch@gmail.com Posted June 3, 2016 Report Share Posted June 3, 2016 these are all closely related issues/questions. so, if I have 10 devices, all synced to one pool, and one device dies for good due to hardware failure, do I really need to unlink every other of the 9 devices in the entire pool, and relink them? removal of dead devices should be a feature of the next release IMHO. how do I see the names of all my dead and live peers? how do I convert read-write folders to read-only folders in a peer pool? again, unlink first, and then relink? I presumably would then ignore the warning that the folders already contains files upon adding, and getsync would be smart enough to figure out that they are the same. right? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Helen Posted June 3, 2016 Report Share Posted June 3, 2016 4 hours ago, ivo.welch@gmail.com said: do I really need to unlink every other of the 9 devices in the entire pool, and relink them? removal of dead devices should be a feature of the next release IMHO. You can hide the dead device in My devices list. Described here . 4 hours ago, ivo.welch@gmail.com said: how do I see the names of all my dead and live peers? Dead/offline are grayed out, live - are with green dot in My devices list. 4 hours ago, ivo.welch@gmail.com said: how do I convert read-write folders to read-only folders in a peer pool? again, unlink first, and then relink? Changing permission to RO for one of your linked device requires relinking. Same for any standard folders. Converting permission is availabe only on advanced folders for peers not belonging to you identity, in Sync Pro. 4 hours ago, ivo.welch@gmail.com said: right? right. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
David Loke Posted December 25, 2016 Report Share Posted December 25, 2016 I think unlinking remotely is very important... unsure why it is not in the plan to develop this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lost Copter Posted January 3, 2017 Report Share Posted January 3, 2017 (edited) I agree remote linking would be a really nice feature to have. Is there a technical security reason or reason related to the BT sync protocol that makes it not feasible? Edit: Although I guess clearing old devices per https://help.getsync.com/hc/en-us/articles/204762439 optically gets to more or less what I want (apart from know that there are technically phantom devices still linked). Edit 2: Interesting for others who care, I made an image of a computer with hardware issues and then unlinked the computer from my Resilio account. Restored image of that computer to new hardware and the new hardware/computer started syncing with my existing devices again as though I never unlinked it. Is there basically no difference between unlinking on a device vs. clearing old devices from a remote device? Edited January 3, 2017 by Lost Copter Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ivarson Posted January 4, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2017 @Lost Copter Quite interesting observation. Without knowing much about Sync's internals, when you're joining a machine with your identity you basically transfer at least the user certificate to that box, but I thought there were a machine certificate generated during join-process too. Unlink-process should then invalidate that machine cert so no other peer would accept it, sorta revocation. Any official comment on that? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Helen Posted January 6, 2017 Report Share Posted January 6, 2017 There is no any machine-based certificate, thus there is nothing to invalidate. Certificate is identity-based, so you cannot remotely remove it only from some of the devices. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ivarson Posted January 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2017 18 minutes ago, Helen said: There is no any machine-based certificate, thus there is nothing to invalidate. Certificate is identity-based, so you cannot remotely remove it only from some of the devices. Thanks for clearing that out. I thought revocation was essential for an PKI-solution. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.