[network-health] Changes on the Tor Network - #31549

[David Goulet]

On 09 Sep (16:19:28), Stephanie A. Whited wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> David Goulet:
> > Hello All!
> >
> > I've put a small set of people in CC that are involved in this change for now
> > so we can make good progress forward! (and not stall)
> >
> > We are soon (some low values of "soon" hopefully) to reject all non supported
> > relays, by tor version, from the network:
> >
> >     https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/31549
> >
> > At this very point in time, this represents in total ~12.72% of the total
> > bandwidth weight thus roughly 1/8th of the network will be removed (in terms
> > of bandwidth capability).
> >
> > In terms of "relay volume", this change will remove about ~1/7th of the total
> > network or 923/6349.
> >
> > Roger already emailed hundred(s?) of operators to ask them to upgrade and many
> > have responded but as you can see, the total bandwidth weight has barely moved
> > :S.
> >
> > Our nusenu volunteer also made it public on tor-relays@ mailing list:
> >
> >     https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2019-September/017711.html
> >
> > So let say for a journalist, or our millions of users, this will mean a
> > "considerable" drop in the Metrics graph of total number of relays.
> > Fortunately, we can explain it :). So lets be pro-active!
> >
> > I _strongly_ think we should do a blog post at minimum to tell the world what
> > is about to happen and not silently do this. It should have a clear, simple,
> > easy section of "If you run a relay, please upgrade by doing so ...".
> >
> > Hopefully, with a bigger microphone, we'll be able to drop the 12.72% to
> > something much more acceptable.
> >
> > We have _good_ reasons to do it so this is not a public debate but rather an
> > informative post.
> >
> > I'm voluntering to help draft this but since I'm not a native English speaker,
> > I will need help.
> >
> > @stephw: What do you think here? Advice on how to proceed?
> 
> We should definitely have a blog post and share on all of our channels +
> reddit.
> 
> I think we should choose a date that this will happen and stick to it.
> This way people will take it seriously and we can campaign more
> effectively. We should probably give at least a month from when we
> publish the rejection date. T

There is a challenge here since these reject can only happen with the release
of a new "tor" since directory authorities (majority of them) will need to
switch to that release.

And as you know, tor releases are ... chaotic maybe for lack of a better word?
As in not much "scheduled in stone as we would like to".

Once we have the blog post and everything ready for social media, we can
surely coordinate with Nick on a date +/- some low values of days.

> 
> We can also take this opportunity to promote setting up new relays. 
> 
> Next up very soon on my plate is a push for getting companies to set up
> more relays, so these campaigns could coincide depending on when you
> want to go through with it.
> 
> I started a campaign brief we can keep filling out after more decisions
> are made:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JnE0tIrGVGlGabD6bAv5zjvbwHY3wjLTCOItWoXrS4w/edit?usp=sharing
> 
> Happy to help edit the post!

Thanks! I'll try to get to the draft this week before I leave for 2 weeks on
vacation! lol

Cheers!
David

-- 
gKCHWw6NdT9QtZbud0Uwm756HrH5xaSQ5vhmb6j2WUk=
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/network-health/attachments/20190909/839943db/attachment.sig>