[tor-dev] tor-roaster.org creates incentives for *non*-proper MyFamily configurations
nusenu at openmailbox.org
Sat Mar 5 00:48:02 UTC 2016
(since this is not really part of that ticket I'm moving this reply to
Replying to [comment:21 virgil]:
> Re: comment #15
>> 2) there are no incentives for a relay operator to set it properly
> Roster aims to fix this. http://tor-roster.org
Quite the opposite I think.
tor-roster creates incentives for lazy operators because it does not
require a proper MyFamily configuration to aggregate relays into a group.
tor-roaster's way to group relays (one mutual connection into a group of
relays is enough iirc) does not match tor's definition of MyFamily.
While tor-roster's way to group actual set of relays to it's operator
might represent a more accurate picture of reality than systems that do
require proper MyFamily configs, it misses the possibility to create
incentives for proper configurations.
> For what it's worth, Roster also makes MyFamily a bit less painful to
> work with because the detected families are now robust to changes
> in the Family graph. For details see 
This causes the offset between tor's and tor-roster's
To give you an example, roster says this relay is part of a 24 relays
group  even though it has only a mutual MyFamily with two other relays:
Ideally tor-roster would make it very clear on their website that groups
do not require a complete mutual MyFamily agreement between all relays
in that group, or require proper MyFamily configuration to create
incentives for properly configured families.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the tor-dev