- network-health - lists.torproject.org

Metrics Portal - REST API
by David Goulet 23 Nov '20

23 Nov '20

Hi Karsten! (Metrics and health team CCed) Network team has been working on a new "MetricsPort"[1] in tor which can expose counters of different metrics within "tor". It currently uses the Prometheus model [2] which then allows us to create proper monitoring graphs using tools like Grafana (see some example screenshots in #40063). The short term goal here also is to provide Grafana templates for monitoring a relay or onion service so people can just download them automatically from their marketplace and are ready to go. Then that made us think, what if we could have something similar on metrics.torproject.org. A page that we could query like "/prometheus" that would just give us a set of counters of the current state of the network. A bit like a REST API but less "API-issh". I do recall having seen at one point a REST API item on the metrics roadmap but I'm not entirely sure about my memory hence why I'm probing you about this. Likely at first, what such a page would expose is not different from what metrics has at the moment _but_ the difference is that it would allow anyone (most importantly us) to be able to aggregate visualization in one dashboard using latest visualization tech (Grafana for instance). This kind of page can usually handle thousands of requests a second without blinking so the load impact should be minimal since this is exposing an already existing state to the world rather than querying a state (like I assume Onionoo does?). Maybe the solution here could be to instead write an "exporter" that queries Onionoo and formats it nicely for a Prometheus server but I do fear the load that it could put on Onionoo if let say A LOT of metrics are queried every 5 seconds or so? The other thing is maybe the exporter idea is better, unclear, if we want to be more agile at integrating other types of metrics like let say monitoring the consensus like consensus-health does or extracting different data from extra-info. Thoughts? Cheers! David [1] https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/40063 [2] https://prometheus.io/docs/concepts/data_model/ -- 6/YYHbjbLDDZ9bG5utUI1Ts1W+SmKf0zyZc8rfr0FXY=

2 1

West Coast US Tor Relays Slow - Low Consensus Weight versus East Coast
by Neel Chauhan 06 Aug '20

06 Aug '20

Hi network-health@/tor-relays@ mailing lists, I noticed one thing: Tor relays on the West Coast US (and Canada) are generally slower than those on say the East Coast and in Europe. I moved to the West Coast this January, but this was not an issue in the past when looking at dedicated servers I had from the West Coast prior to this year. These are two middle relay instances on an Gigabit FTTH connection (Wave G in Redmond, WA): https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/B0F9BA27944FA59E3B1A182208FF… https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/DB710B14D7329B7289CFCC547F48… The Consensus Weight often is slower than the Advertised Bandwidth, and isn't ramping up despite having lots of bandwidth. I set RelayBandwidthRate to about 500 Mbps on each instance. This isn't just a Wave G problem, this affects almost every relay in the West Coast including other Gigabit ISPs such as AT&T (AS7018) and Sonic (AS46375), as well as hosting companies and colocation facilities. For instance, my Los Angeles-based Exit relays at Psychz Networks (AS40676) show this issue (however they are new): https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/156AAC3FAD1ACC8906316519DCB4… https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/A69CEB30328B1E85C6B167FECAF2… Even Emerald Onion has this issue: https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/09DCA3360179C6C8A5A20DDDE1C5… What is causing this issue and is there a solution? Is it backbone congestion due to COVID-19? The high load on dirauths? sbws regressions? Can I help fix this issue? I am a Core Tor contributor and am open to also working on sbws. Is there a way to optimize my relays (they run FreeBSD). -Neel === https://www.neelc.org/

1 0

No network health meeting today 27 April 2020
by Georg Koppen 27 Apr '20

27 Apr '20

Hi! Sorry for the late reply but we won't have a network health meeting this week. I am aiming to do a sync on Monday, May 4 2020 again at our usual time (1800 UTC). Georg

1 0

Status update for our bad relay processes
by Georg Koppen 08 Apr '20

08 Apr '20

Hi! I just sent a status update about our bad relays work to tor-relays[1]. It's focused on relay operators which is why I chose that list but, in case you are not reading it, I thought sending at least a note to this list as well as that mail essentially concerns network health questions (too). Georg [1] https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2020-April/018356.html

1 0

Next weekly meeting 20 April 2020
by Georg Koppen 08 Apr '20

08 Apr '20

Hello! I forgot to talk about it in our weekly sync earlier this week but as next Monday is a public holiday in a bunch of jurisdictions (Easter Monday) we'll skip that meeting. The next one will be held on 20 April same time, same place. See you there, Georg

1 0

Upgrade your 'tarragon' Tor relay?
by Roger Dingledine 06 Apr '20

06 Apr '20

Hi William, You are running a Tor relay, which is great: http://rougmnvswfsmd4dq.onion/rs.html#details/1D4AB6248E3D7DF9C4FBE40DCFAA3… First: that Tor version is obsolete, and because of old bugs, we will soon cut relays running those versions out of the network. Please consider upgrading! Second: let us know if there is any way to help you bump up the bandwidth that you are allocating to the Tor relay. :) You can find Tor packages for your distro / OS here: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TorRelayGuide#Platformspecifi… Ideally you will switch to keeping up with our stable releases, but if you need a stable that is especially stable, the Tor 0.3.5 branch will be maintained until Feb 2022: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTor… and you can see the lifetimes of other Tor versions on that table too. Let us know if we can do anything to make the process easier. And lastly, I am cc'ing the new network health mailing list (which has public archives), to help us stay synced: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkHealthTeam Thanks! --Roger

3 2

Re: [network-health] [tor-relays] Low bandwidth
by teor 01 Apr '20

01 Apr '20

Hi, I'm cc'ing the network health team, so they are aware of this issue. >>> On 30 Mar 2020, at 23:00, ha3ks ha3ks(a)protonmail.com wrote: >>> my relay dropped nearly all it’s bandwidth about a month ago, checking over it I can see 3 of the dir auths have given it a low consensus weighting, would that cause low bandwidth numbers? >>> I checked my ufw in Ubuntu and it’s allowing 443 and 80. >> >> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:44:41 +1000 >> From: teor teor(a)riseup.net >> >> I have seen similar reports from a few other relay operators. >> >> What is your relay fingerprint? >> >> Have you followed the troubleshooting instructions here: >> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/MyRelayIsSlow > > On 31 Mar 2020, at 20:46, ha3ks <ha3ks(a)protonmail.com> wrote: > > The fingerprint is - 6E1DA4C0B0C05FB721B42329C47A20DA22908AEB > > I have followed some of this yes, though its a little over my head I have opened a ticket in sbws to follow up this issue: sbws measures some relays 100x lower than Torflow https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/33775 It could be related to these other issues: sbws does not detect changes in descriptor bandwidth values https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/30733 sbws bandwidth scans should require a minimum exit bandwidth https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/33009 T

2 2

Your Tor bridge is running an obsolete version
by Philipp Winter 24 Mar '20

24 Mar '20

Hi there, You seem to be running the following Tor bridge, which is great: 2B280B23E1107BB62ABFC40DDCC8824814F80A72 But that Tor version (0.2.9.16) is obsolete, and because of old bugs, we will soon cut bridges running those versions out of the network. Please consider upgrading! You can find Tor packages and instructions for your distro / OS here: <https://community.torproject.org/relay/setup/bridge/> Ideally you will switch to keeping up with our stable releases, but if you need a stable that is especially stable, the Tor 0.3.5 branch will be maintained until Feb 2022: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTor…> and you can see the lifetimes of other Tor versions on that table too. Let us know if we can do anything to make the process easier. And lastly, I am copying the new network health mailing list (which has public archives), to help us stay synced: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkHealthTeam> Thanks, Philipp

2 2

Reminder: next weekly meetings will be on Mondays 1800 UTC
by Georg Koppen 24 Mar '20

24 Mar '20

Hello! As announced earlier[1] we'll switch to 1800 UTC as our weekly meeting time starting next Monday (3/30) after the Europeans switched to summer time. The location (#tor-meeting on the OFTC IRC network) stays the same. See you there, Georg [1] https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/network-health/2020-March/000587.html

1 0

Tor Exit Failures
by [REDACTED] 19 Mar '20

19 Mar '20

hello >From time to time (about once a week for one day) the exit scanner of arthur edelstein[1] shows my windows exit[2] with a failure rate. I usually only see this happening when the "Average probability weighted failure rate" is high too so i wonder if his measuring is reliable or if it is not a problem on my side. If the failure rate is correct is there a way for me to find out why or when the failures are happening? Georg, you wrote that you are currently doing these tests too. Could you tell me the results of my relay? Thanks [1] https://arthuredelstein.net/exits/ [2] DC81AA3B1D51566DBF27BFA562E4047AEB1C52DA

2 2