[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #23863 [Core Tor/Tor]: When our directory guards don't have each others' microdescs, we should mark some dead
#23863: When our directory guards don't have each others' microdescs, we should
mark some dead
-----------------------------------------------+---------------------------
Reporter: teor | Owner: (none)
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: Medium | Milestone: Tor:
| 0.3.2.x-final
Component: Core Tor/Tor | Version: Tor:
| 0.3.0.6
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: tor-guard, tor-bridge, tor-client | Actual Points:
Parent ID: #21969 | Points: 1
Reviewer: | Sponsor:
-----------------------------------------------+---------------------------
Comment (by teor):
Replying to [comment:4 Sebastian]:
> Load on dirauths is extremely light right now IMO. Having clients
contact dirauths would be bad, but having relays contact dirauths early
and a bit more aggressively (and maybe having dirauths ultra-aggressively
try every other dirauth) doesn't sound like the end of the world to me. I
am currently seeing less than 3MB/s (averaged over 30 second intervals)
peak outgoing bandwidth on my dirauth which is basically negligible.
I am not sure we can have relays try fast enough to make sure this bug
never happens on clients. That would cause issues every hour from about
hh:00 to hh:01.
Why don't we have clients remember where they got the consensus, and try
it for any missing microdescs before trying an authority?
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23863#comment:5>
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