Re: blutmagie TNS / v0.2.2.15 nodes
Hi Olaf,
On 8/25/10 12:10 PM, Olaf Selke wrote:
blutmagie Tor network status site apparently displays incorrect
bandwidth values for all nodes running version 0.2.2.15. Unlike other
tns sites blutmagie calculated bw as an average from the extra-info data
instead of using the bw peak value. So far I don't have a clue what's
going wrong. The extra-info format might have changed or my Perl script
populating the mysql db might be buggy.
Blutmagie4 which is is running v0.2.2.14 for testing purpose still shows
up with the correct bw
http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/index.php?SR=BandwidthSO=Desc. All
0.2.2.15 nodes like trusted, teunTest, or the other three blutmagie
nodes are displayed with a bw being obviously much too low.
This might be related to:
Changes in version 0.2.2.15-alpha - 2010-08-18
- Relays report the number of bytes spent on answering directory
requests in extra-info descriptors similar to {read,write}-history.
Implements enhancement 1790.
There are now two new lines dirreq-read-history ... and
dirreq-write-history ... containing the bytes spent on the dir
protocol. Maybe TNS greps for read-history and not ^read-history
when parsing descriptors?
I'll have more time to investigate this tomorrow. Please let me know if
you find something interesting in the meantime.
Thanks,
--Karsten
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
Re: blutmagie TNS / v0.2.2.15 nodes
Le mercredi 25 août 2010 12.35:45, vous avez écrit :
Hi Olaf,
On 8/25/10 12:10 PM, Olaf Selke wrote:
blutmagie Tor network status site apparently displays incorrect
bandwidth values for all nodes running version 0.2.2.15. Unlike other
tns sites blutmagie calculated bw as an average from the extra-info data
instead of using the bw peak value. So far I don't have a clue what's
going wrong. The extra-info format might have changed or my Perl script
populating the mysql db might be buggy.
Blutmagie4 which is is running v0.2.2.14 for testing purpose still shows
up with the correct bw
http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/index.php?SR=BandwidthSO=Desc. All
0.2.2.15 nodes like trusted, teunTest, or the other three blutmagie
nodes are displayed with a bw being obviously much too low.
This might be related to:
Changes in version 0.2.2.15-alpha - 2010-08-18
- Relays report the number of bytes spent on answering directory
requests in extra-info descriptors similar to {read,write}-history.
Implements enhancement 1790.
There are now two new lines dirreq-read-history ... and
dirreq-write-history ... containing the bytes spent on the dir
protocol. Maybe TNS greps for read-history and not ^read-history
when parsing descriptors?
I'll have more time to investigate this tomorrow. Please let me know if
you find something interesting in the meantime.
Thanks,
--Karsten
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
Hello,
Thanks for your post, i was running TorTeamHelp with 0.2.2.15-alpha-dev and
using extra info to sending stats and from that it's appear that my bandwitch
was show as 4 KB instead 400 KB.
So i was surprised to see average so low... :P
Have a great day
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
Re: blutmagie TNS / v0.2.2.15 nodes
Am 25.08.2010 12:35, schrieb Karsten Loesing:
On 8/25/10 12:10 PM, Olaf Selke wrote:
blutmagie Tor network status site apparently displays incorrect
bandwidth values for all nodes running version 0.2.2.15. Unlike other
tns sites blutmagie calculated bw as an average from the extra-info data
instead of using the bw peak value.
[...]
This might be related to:
Changes in version 0.2.2.15-alpha - 2010-08-18
- Relays report the number of bytes spent on answering directory
requests in extra-info descriptors similar to {read,write}-history.
Implements enhancement 1790.
There are now two new lines dirreq-read-history ... and
dirreq-write-history ... containing the bytes spent on the dir
protocol. Maybe TNS greps for read-history and not ^read-history
when parsing descriptors?
yes exactly!
And cause the dirreq-history data lines are displayed behind the
ordinary read/write history data, the script summed up the dirreq
bandwidth. Thus blutmagie tns mistakenly displayed the (correct)
directory request bandwidth for all 0.2.2.15 nodes. This is fixed now.
regards Olaf
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
Re: blutmagie TNS / v0.2.2.15 nodes
Le Wed, 25 Aug 2010 18:49:12 +0200,
Olaf Selke olaf.se...@blutmagie.de a écrit :
Am 25.08.2010 12:35, schrieb Karsten Loesing:
On 8/25/10 12:10 PM, Olaf Selke wrote:
blutmagie Tor network status site apparently displays incorrect
bandwidth values for all nodes running version 0.2.2.15. Unlike
other tns sites blutmagie calculated bw as an average from the
extra-info data instead of using the bw peak value.
[...]
This might be related to:
Changes in version 0.2.2.15-alpha - 2010-08-18
- Relays report the number of bytes spent on answering directory
requests in extra-info descriptors similar to
{read,write}-history. Implements enhancement 1790.
There are now two new lines dirreq-read-history ... and
dirreq-write-history ... containing the bytes spent on the dir
protocol. Maybe TNS greps for read-history and not ^read-history
when parsing descriptors?
yes exactly!
And cause the dirreq-history data lines are displayed behind the
ordinary read/write history data, the script summed up the dirreq
bandwidth. Thus blutmagie tns mistakenly displayed the (correct)
directory request bandwidth for all 0.2.2.15 nodes. This is fixed now.
regards Olaf
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
hi Olaf,
Thanks to have fixed it ! i comfirm that is fixed for me :D
have a great day .
SwissTorHelp
***
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majord...@torproject.org with
unsubscribe or-talkin the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/
