Re: [tor-relays] consensus update request
On Jan 8, 2012, at 3:09 PM, Scott Bennett wrote: > The last consensus document expired about 15 hours ago. I understand > that the authority operators and tor developers are probably occupied with > fixing whatever is the trouble, but if someone in that group of individuals > can spare a moment to fill us in on what is happening, I, for one, would > greatly appreciate it. > FWIW, I think a page on the torproject.org web site for very brief > status updates on extraordinary situations like this one would be a good > and helpful addition. > Thanks much, and best of luck getting things working right again. People are indeed working to restore service. Currently it looks like two authorities are completely offline, and a couple others are too overloaded to function properly wrt voting. In the meantime you might like https://metrics.torproject.org/consensus-health.html which monitors the consensus. ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] consensus update request
Thanks, Sebastian, for the very quick reply. On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 15:12:25 +0100 Sebastian Hahn wrote: >On Jan 8, 2012, at 3:09 PM, Scott Bennett wrote: > >> The last consensus document expired about 15 hours ago. I understand >> that the authority operators and tor developers are probably occupied with >> fixing whatever is the trouble, but if someone in that group of individuals >> can spare a moment to fill us in on what is happening, I, for one, would >> greatly appreciate it. >> FWIW, I think a page on the torproject.org web site for very brief >> status updates on extraordinary situations like this one would be a good >> and helpful addition. >> Thanks much, and best of luck getting things working right again. > >People are indeed working to restore service. Currently it looks like Glad to know that. >two authorities are completely offline, and a couple others are too >overloaded to function properly wrt voting. Hmm. Will this situation, then, result in a renewed effort to find a few more people to run authorities? > >In the meantime you might like >https://metrics.torproject.org/consensus-health.html which monitors the >consensus. Thanks for that, too. It's not what I had in mind, but it is interesting, nonetheless. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * ** ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] consensus update request
On Jan 8, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Scott Bennett wrote: > Thanks, Sebastian, for the very quick reply. > On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 15:12:25 +0100 Sebastian Hahn > wrote: >> On Jan 8, 2012, at 3:09 PM, Scott Bennett wrote: >>>The last consensus document expired about 15 hours ago. I understand >>> that the authority operators and tor developers are probably occupied with >>> fixing whatever is the trouble, but if someone in that group of individuals >>> can spare a moment to fill us in on what is happening, I, for one, would >>> greatly appreciate it. >>>FWIW, I think a page on the torproject.org web site for very brief >>> status updates on extraordinary situations like this one would be a good >>> and helpful addition. >>>Thanks much, and best of luck getting things working right again. >> >> People are indeed working to restore service. Currently it looks like > > Glad to know that. > >> two authorities are completely offline, and a couple others are too >> overloaded to function properly wrt voting. > > Hmm. Will this situation, then, result in a renewed effort to find > a few more people to run authorities? The problem is that in the current situation, it gets worse with more authorities, not better. Our voting mechanism needs an overhaul :/ >> In the meantime you might like >> https://metrics.torproject.org/consensus-health.html which monitors the >> consensus. > > Thanks for that, too. It's not what I had in mind, but it is > interesting, nonetheless. what did you have in mind? ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] consensus update request
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 03:35:16PM +0100, Sebastian Hahn wrote: > > Hmm. Will this situation, then, result in a renewed effort to find > > a few more people to run authorities? > > The problem is that in the current situation, it gets worse with more > authorities, not better. Our voting mechanism needs an overhaul :/ Indeed. The other problem is that we simply have too many clients out there. And we've taught them all to be eager to keep updated, so they're harder to partition. But it's really a volume thing at this point. We need a more scalable way of keeping clients informed about network topology. In our copious free time, while also doing everything else that needs doing. :/ Anyway, crisis averted, this time. --Roger ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] consensus update request
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 15:35:16 +0100 Sebastian Hahn wrote: > The problem is that in the current situation, it gets worse with more > authorities, not better. Our voting mechanism needs an overhaul :/ Or we need a majority of super-responsive authority operators to keep the majority of dirauths voting. -- Andrew http://tpo.is/contact pgp 0x74ED336B ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] consensus update request
Maybe this is why my client is taking so long to load at the moment. At first I thought it was my update to ossl 100f, but after checking 100e again, it's not. Tor currently sits in the netstatus consensus and missing dir auth phases for indefinite tens of minutes before coming online. valid-until 2012-01-09 20:00:00 Mon Jan 9 22:..:.. UTC 2012 Is this something that's distributable as a piecemeal flood into the net as each router is validated. Some sort of client held table so the scale work and partitioning is done there with their cpu/disk. ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
