Re: [tor-relays] Proper bandwidth units [was: Exit nodes on Gandi]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Actually, lets take a look at it from the other perspective then mine. Considering that the instruction would only be need to be computed once (during application re/start) that isn't much of a task. So with that in mind...human computational error is a significant factor. If the operator didn't do his math correctly, that would have a considerable effect on advertised transfer rate. However, what we're actually arguing here is convention and not computation. THAT is where the problem lies. One person's convention isn't another persons. What is more important is that all configuration follow algorithm rfc. Forget convention because we have to go with the established methods of operation that gets hashed out through the rfc. That is the best way. I operate in bits and don't mind calculating to a convention understood by users and that removes the possibility of error in convention but enables the possibility of human computational error (69 it) which could drastically change how the transfer rate is established on the relay. There is an argument for both, but you guys are arguing about conventions that shouldn't even be considered without a request for comment to the developers. On 11/26/2013 3:53 PM, Gordon Morehouse wrote: > Travis Northrup: > > >>> This argument (Mbit/s versus GiB/month) reminds me of the old >>> saw about the most useless unit of velocity >>> (furlongs/fortnight instead of m/sec). > >>> Mick > >> I know exactly what you mean. Personally, I consider any change >> to be a convenience modification only. In reality the only >> current differences are in defining storage rate and traffic >> rate (1024/1000 respectively) and its defined in bits. From there >> all conversions are simple math that should be operator >> responsibility. > > Why, when the config file can be liberal in what it accepts in the > numerator, and in the denominator (seconds, days, weeks, mean > months)? > > Calculating numbers is a job for a computer. > > Best, -Gordon M. ___ > tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSlU/DAAoJECJSqAwXZ/cnBHoH/iCTd1T4OaLLpin7X+aEZgVB GqvdA6CDAqvTm+LX3hT8pOb/CvbyGBoHvjhJHiGY52u6ChaM+EXNAwqo+XNQJ8NB AfRk5r0WtS7XqWlXLer0EiQICSDfRk3Z6mjxHpvChODARk/wXnJlx3ZisY5H33+U NVEBuXYFqQz4GFFHHXU+Q+DqCHVaz84R5E0ZejZeLkBWLjEQdtVwkuAdQS71Dbda 8Qc4T8/z4/fXivC8dT7r4trPVYcv35dKniZaEf48xuZCmHexEvPPIOIPKCBcIF0F 4BB6hYPmLWUjGJE2lwbsIXxJ+nPCYBg4n/xqxuKlP7oZ7dlNf+lfiYxxeP9CeDc= =4+zj -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Proper bandwidth units [was: Exit nodes on Gandi]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Yes, it can. The program can spend the processor time to run that extra instruction set. Do we actually need or want that? Would it be worth spending the cpu time in exchange for just a miniscule effort to do it ourselves? On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 3:53:25 PM, Gordon Morehouse wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > Travis Northrup: >> >> >>> This argument (Mbit/s versus GiB/month) reminds me of the old >>> saw about the most useless unit of velocity (furlongs/fortnight >>> instead of m/sec). >> >>> Mick >> >> I know exactly what you mean. Personally, I consider any change to >> be a convenience modification only. In reality the only current >> differences are in defining storage rate and traffic rate >> (1024/1000 respectively) and its defined in bits. From there all >> conversions are simple math that should be operator >> responsibility. > > Why, when the config file can be liberal in what it accepts in the > numerator, and in the denominator (seconds, days, weeks, mean months)? > > Calculating numbers is a job for a computer. > > Best, > - -Gordon M. > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > > iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSlRhVAAoJED/jpRoe7/ujzC0IANGMKvdbnvOO9lebNa81ETo9 > 6st2Dyt8Cy3qVmWevVT3JP6GZIpLVAk4M5SeFUm3abY2kbphIJfnnKVGYR/B3ggI > 5uVTUN5uFIZmePAoMxHh53Y9ss5IYizvFFli3jaeg7iJnYjQl6zeogBCp275YCR0 > tbNeZ4BisXzXUDavTm5c23x0d9fo7z7b7i+SMhPs3DanZG3JLPHtTX+aYiBRjRlY > hZJE9K6i+cvYEEId24tqo/uymEw8BFeCj5Ws32Gj9fHXSn64JDUaEawmmTXXsfvA > DTUGLbRAVfdRDWrQl9JXTZLswMkis5SrrTeoehwo93cjgvl5z7uBa6/rK9WxwzY= > =MdoA > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSlTG/AAoJECJSqAwXZ/cnKcIIALVECDceF/aKsJV+D7nxVaJ8 H6tjAwj3nKqY1/LR8uPg7Z3E4mfuIRi6df/WUMxH1NP0sbFpWz1NY30iOEt9lAb1 fLY+exqmCYBifoNB7e5Gcss2QcqGhoCl6T9HYVoT9QmFZrlZvjr0goBCPQEdYwqC p2wW0zZftzCFKl3jCTtAiYslDvCLbujyYtlVWFqjlQjAuWNMJ0z/7Ntx4kquSzCc vKioMv95oQVT2MZywh5amNYNr/qYiKWYbAzL8FwZm9PMG2MQjZGiLxRpmwzmUrp6 HwSGjATO4dOSrRfPWsAW/XwJuioJbILdJUIrs9bXYubN9cX8BSp4PgtMziFDfAw= =BeA7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Proper bandwidth units [was: Exit nodes on Gandi]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Travis Northrup: > > >> This argument (Mbit/s versus GiB/month) reminds me of the old >> saw about the most useless unit of velocity (furlongs/fortnight >> instead of m/sec). > >> Mick > > I know exactly what you mean. Personally, I consider any change to > be a convenience modification only. In reality the only current > differences are in defining storage rate and traffic rate > (1024/1000 respectively) and its defined in bits. From there all > conversions are simple math that should be operator > responsibility. Why, when the config file can be liberal in what it accepts in the numerator, and in the denominator (seconds, days, weeks, mean months)? Calculating numbers is a job for a computer. Best, - -Gordon M. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSlRhVAAoJED/jpRoe7/ujzC0IANGMKvdbnvOO9lebNa81ETo9 6st2Dyt8Cy3qVmWevVT3JP6GZIpLVAk4M5SeFUm3abY2kbphIJfnnKVGYR/B3ggI 5uVTUN5uFIZmePAoMxHh53Y9ss5IYizvFFli3jaeg7iJnYjQl6zeogBCp275YCR0 tbNeZ4BisXzXUDavTm5c23x0d9fo7z7b7i+SMhPs3DanZG3JLPHtTX+aYiBRjRlY hZJE9K6i+cvYEEId24tqo/uymEw8BFeCj5Ws32Gj9fHXSn64JDUaEawmmTXXsfvA DTUGLbRAVfdRDWrQl9JXTZLswMkis5SrrTeoehwo93cjgvl5z7uBa6/rK9WxwzY= =MdoA -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
