On Sun, Jun 02, 2019 at 10:43:14PM +1000, teor wrote:
Let's deploy sbws to half the bandwidth authorities, wait 2 weeks, and see if exit bandwidths improve.
We should measure the impact of this change using the tor-scaling measurement criteria. (And we should make sure it doesn't conflict with any other tor-scaling changes.)
Rolling out more sbws measurers sounds good to me.
But, maybe I haven't been following, but isn't the first plan for sbws to replace torflow but have identical behavior? And then we can work on changing it to have better behavior?
I ask because in that case switching to more sbws measurers should not cause the exit bandwidths to improve, until we then change the measurers to measure better.
If we do decide to change AuthDirMaxServersPerAddr, let's work out how many new relays would be added to the consensus straight away. There shouldn't be too many, but let's double-check.
$ grep "^r " moria1-vote | cut -d' ' -f7 | sort | uniq -c | sort -n
yields these IP address counts that have more than 2 relays on them:
3 163.172.132.167 [only 2 actually Running] 3 80.210.238.199 [it's a snap package, 0 Running] 4 78.146.180.236 [only 1 actually Running] 5 93.202.254.196 [0 Running] 6 218.221.205.161 [they're all on the same port, 0 Running] 7 212.24.106.116 [at least 4 Running] 8 79.137.70.81 [0 Running] 9 159.89.4.187 [0 Running] 10 212.24.110.13 [at least 4 Running]
So I believe that if we change it to 4 relays per IP address, we would get 4 more relays in the consensus currently.
And if we change it to 3 relays per IP address, we would get only 2 more relays currently.
Of course, once we make it clearer that big relays can run more instances per IP address, some people might choose to simplify their set-ups.
--Roger