[tor-bugs] #22453 [Core Tor/Tor]: Relays should regularly do a larger bandwidth self-test
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki
blackhole at torproject.org
Wed Nov 21 08:33:33 UTC 2018
#22453: Relays should regularly do a larger bandwidth self-test
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: arma | Owner: juga
Type: defect | Status:
| needs_information
Priority: Medium | Milestone: Tor:
| 0.4.0.x-final
Component: Core Tor/Tor | Version:
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: 034-triage-20180328, | Actual Points:
034-removed-20180328, tor-bwauth, |
035-backport, 034-backport-maybe, 033 |
-backport-maybe, 029-backport-maybe-not |
Parent ID: #25925 | Points:
Reviewer: teor | Sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by arma):
Replying to [comment:33 teor]:
> More realistically, the top 10% of relays are at 125 megabits per
second:
> https://metrics.torproject.org/advbwdist-
relay.html?start=2018-08-21&end=2018-11-19&n=500
>
> Therefore, it would take log,,2,,(125 / 20)*5 = 13 days for sbws to get
an accurate bandwidth for most (90%) of relays, if there was no client
traffic.
>
> Do you think that's ok?
This is a fun analysis!
First, I'll start with a "yes we could live with that."
But second, if we have six sbws's going, and there's a lot of variance
with each test (sometimes it's faster than expected, sometimes slower), I
think the time until one of the tests happens to hit some great
throughput, on a relay that's way faster than its self-advertised number,
would end up quite a bit less than this analysis predicts. That is, I
think it would be quite common to more-than-double, not just double, at
each iteration.
And third, what's the "every five days" parameter? Should we teach sbws
that when its recent measurements have showed the relay to be way faster
than its consensus weight, that means we "don't have enough good recent
measurements" and we need to get more (and better) measurements? It seems
like there's a lot of space for sbws to be smarter about doing tests for
relays that appear to be on an upward trajectory. (But this said, I would
still want to try to keep the priority function as simple as possible, to
avoid making it hard to analyze what's going wrong: #28519)
Ultimately, in a design where we base our changes proportional to the
self-advertised bandwidth, we are limited by the feedback cycle between
"we induce load on relay" and "relay publishes descriptor with higher
number". We intentionally slowed down that feedback cycle in the #23856
fix, so I don't see a way around accepting that -- even best case -- it
will take some days to get to the proper number.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/22453#comment:40>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
More information about the tor-bugs
mailing list