Re: [tor-dev] . tor-roster's geo diversity badge and self-ref relays

[Roger Dingledine]

On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 11:20:11PM +0200, Tom van der Woerdt wrote:
> I agree, and this one in particular is important to some operators: by 
> allowing a relay to specify itself in the family, one can just have a single 
> configuration file for all relays in a family. 

Maybe somebody wants to make a trac ticket pointing to this thread,
and suggesting that Tor should notice when it's about to list its
own fingerprint in its family line, and just quietly leave it out?

I bet that would be an easy minor feature for somebody to add, and it
would avoid creating this confusion in the future.

--Roger

___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev

Re: [tor-dev] . tor-roster's geo diversity badge and self-ref relays

[Tim Wilson-Brown - teor]

> On 15 Sep 2015, at 08:34, Roger Dingledine  wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 11:20:11PM +0200, Tom van der Woerdt wrote:
>> I agree, and this one in particular is important to some operators: by 
>> allowing a relay to specify itself in the family, one can just have a single 
>> configuration file for all relays in a family.
> 
> Maybe somebody wants to make a trac ticket pointing to this thread,
> and suggesting that Tor should notice when it's about to list its
> own fingerprint in its family line, and just quietly leave it out?
> 
> I bet that would be an easy minor feature for somebody to add, and it
> would avoid creating this confusion in the future.
> 
> —Roger

https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/17065 



Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP 968F094B

teor at blah dot im
OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev

Re: [tor-dev] tor-roster's geo diversity badge and self-ref relays

[Sean Saito]

>> Can this be downgraded to an informational message? (or eliminated entirely?)
>> 
>> Penalties can be quite discouraging, particularly for minor configuration 
>> variants.
>> 
>> Tim
>
>I agree, and this one in particular is important to some operators: by 
>allowing a relay to specify itself in the family, one can just have a single 
>>configuration file for all relays in a family. 

I was not aware of that. I shall take down the penalty then.

Sean
___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev

Re: [tor-dev] . tor-roster's geo diversity badge and self-ref relays

[Sean Saito]

Hi nusenu,


>Do you consider in-family diversity so important - even though all of
>them are run by a single entity anyway?
> How about having a badge for tor network wide diversity?
> I'd consider the tor network's overall diversity far more important than
> in-family diversity because clients won't use more than one relay of a
> given family anyway.

Entire-network diversity is obviously more important than within-operator 
diversity---no doubt 
about that.   We are doing within-operator diversity simply because the it's 
easier to 
measure/understand.  I agree that measuring a family's relay diversity with 
respect to the 
entire Tor network is would be supplementary, maybe even strictly better. I am 
already logging 
relevant data, namely the number of relays per country and total CW per country 
(as you 
suggested previously). The former stastic could be used for badges like "First 
relay in country 
X."

>More than 4/5 of the family's CW is located in countries with a cw lower
>than 2%* (currently means non-top 7 country) and ASes lower than 1.5%*
>(currently means non-top 8 AS)?
>
>That implies some degree of in-family diversity since a big family would
>have to spread across multiple countries/ASes

Although there have been some interesting discussions about which ASes to 
prioritize in putting 
new relays, an actual concrete numerical measure is thus far an unsolved 
problem.  Virgil and I 
have talked about using a new tool (http://labs.apnic.net/vizas/) to observe 
which ASes have 
more interconnections and award bonus points to new relays on them.  When these 
measures become 
better established definitely in favor of making badges for them (perhaps even 
replacing the 
within-operator diversity badges?).

>"No Self-Referencing Relays"
>I'm not sure what exactly you mean by that but I assume it is a MyFamily
>config where a relay includes his own fingerprint. Why does that hurt?
>The unnecessary descriptor space/bw?

This is something Virgil wanted because he thought self-connections were ugly.  
If the 
penalizing of self-connections is found to be uglier than the self-connections 
themselves, we're 
both fine with removing it.

Hope this answers your questions. Thanks for the feedback!


Best,
Sean





___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev

Re: [tor-dev] . tor-roster's geo diversity badge and self-ref relays

[teor]

> On 13 Sep 2015, at 18:18, Sean Saito  wrote:
> 
> >"No Self-Referencing Relays"
> 
> >I'm not sure what exactly you mean by that but I assume it is a MyFamily
> 
> >config where a relay includes his own fingerprint. Why does that hurt?
> 
> >The unnecessary descriptor space/bw?
> 
>  
> 
> This is something Virgil wanted because he thought self-connections were 
> ugly.  If the
> 
> penalizing of self-connections is found to be uglier than the 
> self-connections themselves, we're
> 
> both fine with removing it.
> 

Can this be downgraded to an informational message? (or eliminated entirely?)

Penalties can be quite discouraging, particularly for minor configuration 
variants.

Tim

Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
pgp 0xABFED1AC
https://gist.github.com/teor2345/d033b8ce0a99adbc89c5

teor at blah dot im
OTR D5BE4EC2 255D7585 F3874930 DB130265 7C9EBBC7___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev

Re: [tor-dev] . tor-roster's geo diversity badge and self-ref relays

[Virgil Griffith]

We'll remove it.

-V

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 at 05:20 Tom van der Woerdt  wrote:

>
> On 13 Sep 2015, at 22:09, teor  wrote:
>
>
> On 13 Sep 2015, at 18:18, Sean Saito  wrote:
>
> >"No Self-Referencing Relays"
>
> >I'm not sure what exactly you mean by that but I assume it is a MyFamily
>
> >config where a relay includes his own fingerprint. Why does that hurt?
>
> >The unnecessary descriptor space/bw?
>
>
>
> This is something Virgil wanted because he thought self-connections were
> ugly.  If the
>
> penalizing of self-connections is found to be uglier than the
> self-connections themselves, we're
>
> both fine with removing it.
>
>
> Can this be downgraded to an informational message? (or eliminated
> entirely?)
>
> Penalties can be quite discouraging, particularly for minor configuration
> variants.
>
> Tim
>
>
> I agree, and this one in particular is important to some operators: by
> allowing a relay to specify itself in the family, one can just have a
> single configuration file for all relays in a family.
>
> Tom
>
> ___
> tor-dev mailing list
> tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
>
___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev

[tor-dev] tor-roster's geo diversity badge and self-ref relays

[nusenu]

Hi,

tor-roster has a badge for in-family geo diversity:

"Geo Diversity in Relays (Number of countries / Number of relays >= 0.5)"

Do you consider in-family diversity so important - even though all of
them are run by a single entity anyway?

I'd consider the tor network's overall diversity far more important than
in-family diversity because clients won't use more than one relay of a
given family anyway.

How about having a badge for tor network wide diversity?
Something like:

More than 4/5 of the family's CW is located in countries with a cw lower
than 2%* (currently means non-top 7 country) and ASes lower than 1.5%*
(currently means non-top 8 AS)?

That implies some degree of in-family diversity since a big family would
have to spread across multiple countries/ASes.

potential problem:
"growing" ASes/countries might cross the threshold in that case you
would either have to accept the fact that someone else can take away
that badge by adding relays to your AS/CC ;) or consider the diversity
at relay signup time (less fun)


*) these are arbitrary thresholds


"No Self-Referencing Relays"
I'm not sure what exactly you mean by that but I assume it is a MyFamily
config where a relay includes his own fingerprint. Why does that hurt?
The unnecessary descriptor space/bw?

thanks



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev