Re: [tor-bugs] #33947 [Core Tor/sbws]: Compare sbws and Torflow

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#33947: Compare sbws and Torflow
-+-
 Reporter:  juga |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect   | Status:
 |  needs_review
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  sbws:
 |  1.1.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/sbws|Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  sbws-roadmap, GeorgKoppen202006  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #33121   | Points:
 Reviewer:  gk   |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by gk):

 * status:  new => needs_review
 * reviewer:   => gk


--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #33947 [Core Tor/sbws]: Compare sbws and Torflow

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#33947: Compare sbws and Torflow
-+-
 Reporter:  juga |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect   | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  sbws:
 |  1.1.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/sbws|Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  sbws-roadmap, GeorgKoppen202005  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #33121   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by juga):

 * Attachment "20200523_bw_comparative_10.csv" added.


--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #33947 [Core Tor/sbws]: Compare sbws and Torflow

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#33947: Compare sbws and Torflow
-+-
 Reporter:  juga |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect   | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  sbws:
 |  1.1.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/sbws|Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  sbws-roadmap, GeorgKoppen202005  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #33121   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by juga):

 Following the previous reasoning and data, i implemented other function to
 find over/under-weighted relays.
 I created a modified version of the previous function.
 I attach a new csv file and comment in this ticket due to repeated data
 and comments.
 This is what i found:

 Overweighted relays (#33350)
 

 - maatuska was still overweighting 346 relays while sbws ony 3
 - the 3 sbws cases are due to mising the descriptor average bandwidth
 - all the maatuska cases are missing descriptor observed bandwidth except
 for one relay that have higher conensus and observed bandwidth than
 longclaw, probably cause the stored descriptor was old

 Reasons why i think this happend:
 - maatuska version was not updating correctly descriptors (#30733, #33570)
 what was making skip scaling for many relays that were still included in
 the bandwidth file to vote (#33832, this would be solved by a commit in
 #33832)
 - rounding before limiting to the maximum was probably a problem too
 (would be solved by a commit in #33832 too)
 - these errors were accumulating until we got more torflows cause final
 bandwidth depends on the previous consensus bandwidth

 Underweighted relays (#33775)
 -

 https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/33775

 - maatuska was still underweighting 70 relays while longclaw none
 - it seems that the consensus bandwidth maatuska has for those relays is
 lower than sbws

 Reasons:
 - maybe cause using exits with low capacity (#33009)
 - again not updating often/correctly descriptors and keeping previous low
 values
 - and making them accumulate

 Regarding the total consenus weight, it can be seen here now all bwauths
 are close: https://metrics.torproject.org/totalcw.png?start=2019-12-18

 There is no code to review but someone should check whether my reasoning
 makes sense ;)

 From the list of things to check in this ticket, it would be still missing
 #33198

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #33947 [Core Tor/sbws]: Compare sbws and Torflow

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#33947: Compare sbws and Torflow
-+-
 Reporter:  juga |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect   | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  sbws:
 |  1.1.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/sbws|Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  sbws-roadmap, GeorgKoppen202005  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #33121   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by juga):

 * Attachment "bw_comparative_extra.ods" added.


--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #33947 [Core Tor/sbws]: Compare sbws and Torflow

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#33947: Compare sbws and Torflow
-+-
 Reporter:  juga |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect   | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  sbws:
 |  1.1.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/sbws|Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  sbws-roadmap, GeorgKoppen202005  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #33121   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by juga):

 Something have not commented here is to check is how individual bandwidth
 values differ from one authority to other.
 I think this is useful for #33871, so i'm including it here.
 For that, i've implemented a new function in
 https://gitlab.torproject.org/juga/bwauthealth.
 I obtained the bw of all bwauths for the consensus on 25.05.2020, then in
 libre office i calculated the median of the torflow bwauths, then
 calculated the percentage difference with longclaw and maatuska (right
 before maatuska changed to last sbws version) and finally counted the
 number of relays for which the percentage difference is greater than 50.
 This is 626 relays for lonclaw.
 Then i counted how many of the relays with a percentage difference greater
 than 50 are greater than 1.
 This is 151 for longclaw. The cases in which longclaw (but not Torflow)
 has bw 1 is probably because not having the descriptors and consensus
 bandwidth.
 I attach the libre office file.
 I think it would be interesting also to see if it's actually the case that
 those bw are 1 cause of missing descriptors/consensus.
 I could have include this calculations as part of the code too, but for
 now, it was faster this way.
 I leave for #33350 the case of maatuska and the case in which the sbws bws
 are greater than Torflow.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #33947 [Core Tor/sbws]: Compare sbws and Torflow

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#33947: Compare sbws and Torflow
-+-
 Reporter:  juga |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect   | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  sbws:
 |  1.1.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/sbws|Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  sbws-roadmap, GeorgKoppen202005  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #33121   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by gk):

 * keywords:  sbws-roadmap => sbws-roadmap, GeorgKoppen202005


--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

[tor-bugs] #33947 [Core Tor/sbws]: Compare sbws and Torflow

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#33947: Compare sbws and Torflow
---+---
 Reporter:  juga   |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium |  Milestone:  sbws: 1.1.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/sbws  |Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal |   Keywords:  sbws-roadmap
Actual Points: |  Parent ID:  #33121
   Points: |   Reviewer:
  Sponsor: |
---+---
 gk and i were talking about what to review in #30375 and we thought it'd
 be useful to create a ticket to check whether the bugfixes we have been
 working on (https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/query?keywords=~sbws-
 roadmap=closed) to deploy sbws in all bwauths are working, ie.
 making sbws to behave very close to Torflow.

 I think we should document what to check, where/how to check it and which
 ticket(s) intended to fix it.

 I also think we should add this as documentation in sbws itself because
 they're important questions that have been blockers to deploy sbws in all
 bwauths and to avoid regressions in the future.

 Some of the main things to check that should be further explained are:
 - whether sbws "failures" "low" (#30719)
 - whether the number of relays to vote on reported by sbws "similar" to
 the number of relays reported by torflow (#30727, #30735)
 - whether sbws relay descriptors are updated (#30733)
 - whether sbws router statuses (relay info. from consensus) are updated
 (#30733)
 - whether sbws consensus bandwidth total sum is similar to torflow
 (#33871, #33009, #33350)?
 - whether changes in a relay consensus bandwidth affect in a similar way
 as torflow (#33871)

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs