[tor-dev] Proposal: Tor bandwidth measurements document format

juga juga at riseup.net
Wed May 2 08:34:00 UTC 2018

Hi Iain,

Iain Learmonth:
> Hi,
>> Tor Bandwidth Measurements Document Format
> "Measurement" could mean a method for performing a measurement, a single
> measurement task, a schedule for a repeating measurement task, a
> measurement result or a few other things.

I also wondered whether that was the correct word and considered
"capacity", but didn't convince me.
Teor also suggested me to remove "Document", but i thought i'd keep it,
trying to mean that the spec is only about the "file" and not the
process or how they are formatted somewhere else.

Do you have a suggestion on what other word to use instead of measurements?.

> When Large MeAsurement Platforms (LMAP) wrote documents in the IETF,
> they only ever used measurement as an adjective to avoid any ambiguity.
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-eardley-lmap-terminology-02.txt
> The architecture for LMAP may not fit well with the bandwidth scanner
> architecture, and so I'm not suggesting we adopt the terminology in that
> document throughout.
>>> 2. Format details
>>>   Bandwidth measurements MUST contain the following > sections:
>>>   - Header (exactly once)
>>>   - Relays measurements (zero or more times)
>> Grammar suggestion: "Relay measurements".
> In this case, this would become "Relay measurement result".

More accurate, though starts becoming a bit too long. The title should
probably become then: "Tor Bandwidth Measurements Results Document Format"
Any shorter suggestion?.

> If desirable, I'd be happy to check through the document for any other
> places ambiguities pop up, but I'll let others finish having their
> comments integrated first.

It's fine to continue to make comments on the thread where others
commented, no need to wait until those comments are integrated. But
either way works.

Thanks for your comments!,

More information about the tor-dev mailing list