On 2 May 2018, at 22:39, teor wrote:
>> > Tor accepts zero bandwidths, but they trigger bugs in older Tor
>> > implementations. Therefore, implementations SHOULD NOT produce zero
>> > bandwidths. Instead, they SHOULD use one as their minimum bandwidth.
>
> And if
Hi Nick,
Juga asked me to comment on your review, so she could read it before our
bandwidth meeting this week. If I don't comment on a suggestion, you should
assume I agree with it.
Backwards Compatibility
Nick asked about backwards compatibility. This format uses semantic versioning.
Tor
Hi,
On 02/05/18 10:31, teor wrote:
> So let's try to keep "relay measurement" and "relay bandwidths" as
> separate concepts.
Aaah, ok. Yes, I much prefer "Relay Bandwidth" as the name for the
section in §2. There are then also lots of references to measurement in
§2.2, that should also be
juga:
>>> Each relay_line MUST include the following key_value in arbitrary order:
>>
>> Do existing implementations accept arbitrary order here?
>
> Good question, it seems like bw must be behind node_id, but they can
> have things in front and behind. I probably should create a ticket to
> add
On 2 May 2018, at 19:18, Iain Learmonth wrote:
>> "Measurements Results" describes how the bandwidths are created by
>> some generators. But a generator that believes self-reported results
>> doesn't measure, it just aggregates. (As does a peerflow-style generator.)
>>
>
Hi,
On 02/05/18 09:59, teor wrote:
> Let's use:
> Tor Bandwidth List Format
As we are already using this for the directory lists, I think this makes
sense as a name for the format.
> "Measurements Results" describes how the bandwidths are created by
some generators. But a generator that
On 2 May 2018, at 18:34, juga wrote:
2. Format details
Bandwidth measurements MUST contain the following > sections:
- Header (exactly once)
- Relays measurements (zero or more times)
>>>
>>> Grammar suggestion: "Relay measurements".
>>
>> In this
Hi Iain,
Iain Learmonth:
> Hi,
>
>> Tor Bandwidth Measurements Document Format
>
> "Measurement" could mean a method for performing a measurement, a single
> measurement task, a schedule for a repeating measurement task, a
> measurement result or a few other things.
I also wondered whether
Hi,
> Tor Bandwidth Measurements Document Format
"Measurement" could mean a method for performing a measurement, a single
measurement task, a schedule for a repeating measurement task, a
measurement result or a few other things.
When Large MeAsurement Platforms (LMAP) wrote documents in the
Hi,
Thanks Nick for the comments, i'm replaying only to the parts where i
give an answer or i've more questions. I'd accept the rest of your
suggestions unless there will be further comments.
Nick Mathewson:
> Hi, Juga!
>
> This is a review of the document from
>
Karsten Loesing:
> Hi Juga,
>
> On 2018-05-01 14:36, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> This is a review of the document from
>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/juga0/torspec/c7f06023dd1d5d47adad128de541f8eba2a13bfb/bandwidth-file-spec.txt
>> , which I *think* is the same as the document you have below.
Hi Juga,
On 2018-05-01 14:36, Nick Mathewson wrote:
> This is a review of the document from
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/juga0/torspec/c7f06023dd1d5d47adad128de541f8eba2a13bfb/bandwidth-file-spec.txt
> , which I *think* is the same as the document you have below.
I'd like to review this
Hi, Juga!
This is a review of the document from
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/juga0/torspec/c7f06023dd1d5d47adad128de541f8eba2a13bfb/bandwidth-file-spec.txt
, which I *think* is the same as the document you have below.
I'm reviewing this as though it were a fully new format, since I'm not
Hi,
after teor's revision, second version pasted below.
Changes can be seen: in
https://github.com/juga0/torspec/commits/bandwidth-file-spec
Best,
juga
=
Tor Bandwidth Measurements Document Format
14 matches
Mail list logo