[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #5807 [Tor Bridge]: Propose better bridge usage statistics
#5807: Propose better bridge usage statistics
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
Reporter: karsten | Owner: karsten
Type: enhancement | Status: accepted
Priority: normal | Milestone: Sponsor F: July 1, 2012
Component: Tor Bridge | Version:
Keywords: | Parent: #3261
Points: 14 | Actualpoints:
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
Comment(by karsten):
Yesterday I realized that we might consider #5824 as a feature. If
bridges report relay-only statistics, that includes directory request
statistics, too. That's exactly what we're looking for here except that
we already have the data and don't have to start collecting it.
I tweaked the bridge descriptor sanitizer to leave `"dirreq-*"` lines in
and let it process the April 2012 tarball once again. The result is that
44% of bridge descriptors already contain directory request statistics.
For comparison, our current bridge usage statistics are based on data
contained in 57% of bridge descriptors.
Here's the first catch: the dirreq stats in bridge descriptors are not
broken down by country. To be precise, the `"dirreq-v3-reqs"` lines are
all empty, because that's how we tried to not record directory request
statistics on bridges. But there are lines like `"ok=40,not-enough-
sigs=0,unavailable=0,not-found=0,not-modified=0,busy=0"` that tell us that
we sent responses to 40 directory requests. We can try to fix the missing
by-country statistics by calculating totals from directory requests and
breaking down by country based on unique IP numbers. I'm optimistic that
the result wouldn't be too much off. They should be much more reliable
than statistics based on unique IP numbers only.
The second catch is that we need to discuss whether we can use the data
that we scrubbed from bridge descriptors so far. I'm going to work on a
quick analysis of the April 2012 data today to evaluate whether they're
useful or not. If they are, we should do the tor-dev dance like we do for
#5684 and discuss stopping to sanitize dirreq stats in bridge descriptors.
If we actually can use dirreq stats from bridges, that's going to save us
at least 1 year of waiting until a large enough number of 0.2.4.x bridges
report the statistics proposed earlier in this ticket.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/5807#comment:4>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs