Much of Tor traffic is from long-term circuits moving bulk data, so apparently it will take many hours or even days for rebalancing to fully take effect. Is not clear whether it will cause serious trouble or not.

My thought is that one BWauth in a consensus is better than self-measure, as BWauths are trusted entities and a single rouge BWauth in some kind of attack taking out the rest would be dealt with via manual intervention or the closing down of Tor.

Perhaps the self-measure cap of 10k should be raised as well. Was an anti-gaming mitigation from the pre- BWauth days and may have even preceded the arrival of super-fast relays.

At 12:14 7/30/2015 -0500, you wrote:

Thanks for the heads up!

A fifth bwauth is expected to start voting "real soon now", and I'm not sure why maatuska didn't vote on bwauth data last vote, but I've pinged some folks so hopefully we can get this resolved quickly.

-tom

On 30 July 2015 at 12:04, starlight.2015q2@binnacle.cx wrote:

...

FYI list

https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/16696

Description

At present both 'longclaw' and 'maatuska' have dropped out of the BW consensus ('longclaw' is restarting with new version, not sure about 'maatuska').

This has caused the BW consensus logic to revert to using relay self-measurement for BW weightings due to fewer than three BW authorities participating.

The 10000 cap placed on self-measure values is causing super-fast relays serious demotion and slower relays corresponding promotion in the consensus weighting.

Possibly this may result in network unbalance issues. Some adjustment of the logic seems in order.