>> One proposal I've liked is to socially discourage asymmetrical >> families by giving them with bad badges on Roster. If A says B is >> part of their family but B doesn't reciprocate, A gets a penalty to >> their bandwidth points.
> Maybe don't go as far as penalizing relay operators for attempting to > configure a relay family and not succeeding at it. Keeping family > configurations updated is not exactly trivial. And if the effect is > that relay operators stop configuring families at all, that's not what > we wanted, either. > It would be good to point out configuration problems with family > settings and help operators debug them easily. If my understanding of this is correct, doesn't this also have problems with proof-of-operator? That is, exactly as the current case, there's no inherently reliable way to prove that if A declares B and B doesn't declare A, that there *should* be a bi-directional relation. Other properties of a node/relay only go so far in proof-of-relation. The existence of a bi-directional relation is only taken as a hint for path selection. Given X and Y are chosen and have a bi-directional relation, discard one based on the first chosen. > I started implementing something here and will report back on the > ticket as soon as I'm more convinced that it works. No hints? Regards --leeroy
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
