Hi Karsten,
Does the bridge with hashed fingerprint 678912ABD7398DF8EFC8FA2BC7DEF610710360C4 fulfill the requirements you are looking for? It appears to me it handles more clients than antirio bridge, yet I ma unsure about the IPv4 and IPv6 distribution (don't know how you count them) - if this is ok please let me know exactly what you want me to do and how to check the statistics you mention, and i'll revert with a complete report.
Is it just building Tor from your `task-18460-2` and starting Tor with the same bridge identity?
P.S. this bridge is already running 0.2.8.1-alpha git 1f679d4ae11cd976+26ab2e0 - I assume your patch isn't merged already?
-s7r
On 3/27/2016 10:11 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
Hi everyone,
does anybody here know who operates the bridge with nickname antirio?
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/16609212922F6F1077A1BBA299709E19F9A3FB...
I'm asking, because that bridge has a nice distribution of IPv4 and IPv6 clients:
bridge-ip-versions v4=48,v6=64 bridge-ip-versions v4=56,v6=72
We have a bug where IPv6 addresses are included in bridge-ip-versions statistics but where consensus downloads via IPv6 addresses are not counted. It would be very valuable to test the patch for this bug on the antirio bridge or on another bridge with at least 1/2 of clients connecting via IPv6. (When looking yesterday I didn't find another bridge with that property.)
The patch is commit b79d859 in my task-18460-2 branch:
https://gitweb.torproject.org/karsten/tor.git/log/?h=task-18460-2
In theory it should be sufficient to cherry-pick that commit from any other recent tor branch. It just changes three lines of code.
More details on the ticket:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18460
Thanks!
All the best, Karsten