Path-spec - fast circuits
ilteryuksel at gmail.com
Wed Feb 17 10:15:27 UTC 2010
Firstly thank all of you so much for your concern. I really appreciate all
effort which for anonymity by open source.
Mike, I'm reading and trying to understand your changes on path and
dir-spec. Could you say please why there isn't "Wge" integer value on list?
Can't we select a node with exit flag for guard position?
Also could you please explain what is the condition of below statement on
"If we're using Guard nodes, the first node must be a Guard (see 5 below )"
It says see 5 below but even i've read 5. section i couldn't get what is the
condition of this statement; "if we're using Guard nodes".
Thanks in advance.
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 4:18 AM, Mike Perry <mikeperry at fscked.org> wrote:
> Thus spake Nick Mathewson (nickm at freehaven.net):
> > 2010/2/12 ilter yüksel <ilteryuksel at gmail.com>:
> > > "For circuits that do not need to be "fast", when choosing among
> > > candidates for a path element, we choose randomly. For "fast" circuits,
> > > pick a given router as an exit with probability proportional to its
> > > bandwidth."
> > >
> > > Could anybody explain why Tor pick exit router with probability
> > > to its bandwidth only for fast circuits? As far as i know Tor uses this
> > > technique for load-balance. But why it uses this technique only for
> > > circuits?
> > First of all, "Fast" circuits are a bit misnamed as used in
> > path-spec.txt. Basically, "fast" means "bandwidth-sensitive". The
> > only ones that aren't don't need to be "fast" in this sense are ones
> > that are going to be used only for a tiny amount of traffic.
> > That said, I think the statement in path-spec.txt may be poor. It
> > probably makes sense to weight all choices by bandwidth, now that
> > bandwidth is measured rather than just being self-advertised.
> > To see what the code is actually doing, the string to search for is
> > need_capacity or NEED_CAPACITY. The most interesting layer to look
> > for this is at is where it's passed as a flag to
> > circuit_launch_by_router() or circuit_launch_by_extend_info().
> Ok, I've gone ahead and fixed both the spec and the code in
> mikeperry/consensus-bw-weights4 in my git repo.
> Mike Perry
> Mad Computer Scientist
> fscked.org evil labs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tor-talk