Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ticket29754 #68

Closed
wants to merge 22 commits into from
Closed

Ticket29754 #68

wants to merge 22 commits into from

Conversation

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants
@teor2345
Copy link
Contributor

@teor2345 teor2345 commented Mar 22, 2019

No description provided.

juga0 and others added 9 commits Mar 21, 2019
in the header.

Part of #29754.
of header and lines generated by sbws.

Closes #29754
The final KeyValue isn't followed by SP.

The spaces are added between KeyValues when the RelayLine is formatted.
in the Bandwidth Lines, so that Tor directory authorities do not
vote on relays that were not successfully measured, but they are
reported in the Bandwidth File.

Closes #29813.
When there are not enough eligible relays, put all the relays in the file
for diagnostic purposes. But mark them so that Tor ignores them.

Specification for 29853.
Copy link
Contributor

@juga0 juga0 left a comment

Here are some initial comments, i might review more if you don't do it in the meanwhile.

Edit: add comments word

bandwidth-file-spec.txt Show resolved Hide resolved
bandwidth-file-spec.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bandwidth-file-spec.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bandwidth-file-spec.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bandwidth-file-spec.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
way they would vote for a relay that is not present in the file.

This MAY be the case when this relay was not successfully measured but
the is included in the Bandwidth File, to diagnose why they were not
Copy link
Contributor

@juga0 juga0 Mar 22, 2019

Suggested change
the is included in the Bandwidth File, to diagnose why they were not
it is included in the Bandwidth File, to diagnose why they were not

Copy link
Contributor

@juga0 juga0 Mar 24, 2019

Changed in teor2345#1

ignore this KeyValue, generator implementations MUST set "bw=1"
for a relay when Tor directory authorities SHOULD ignore its relay
line. Using the minimum bw value allows authorities that do not
understand "vote=0" or "unmeasured=1" to produce sensible votes
Copy link
Contributor

@juga0 juga0 Mar 22, 2019

sensible might be a bit abstract?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@teor2345 teor2345 Mar 26, 2019

I'll say "reasonable votes for unmeasured relays".

Copy link
Contributor Author

@teor2345 teor2345 Mar 29, 2019

I rewrote this part in c8cf8db.


This KeyValue was added in version 1.4.0 of this specification.

"real_bw=" Int
Copy link
Contributor

@juga0 juga0 Mar 22, 2019

Hmm, we're not calculating the bandwidth for the relays excluded (https://github.com/torproject/sbws/blob/6070d36022dc2130518dd0c68332166b2bf76c73/sbws/lib/v3bwfile.py#L618), though the case here is different.
Since Tor is not going to use it for now, do we really want to include this in this version?.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@teor2345 teor2345 Mar 26, 2019

See my response in:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/29853#comment:7

I want to remove real_bw, and use the measured/filtered/scaled bandwidth for relays exluded by under_min_report.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@teor2345 teor2345 Mar 29, 2019

I rewrote this part in c8cf8db.

bandwidth-file-spec.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bandwidth-file-spec.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bandwidth-file-spec.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@teor2345
Copy link
Contributor Author

@teor2345 teor2345 commented Mar 29, 2019

Squashed in #71.

@teor2345 teor2345 closed this Mar 29, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment