Re: directory authority/authorities need(s) updating?

[Scott Bennett <bennett@xxxxxxxxxx>]

     On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:50:50 -0500 Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
>On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 09:02:28PM +0100, Dominik Schaefer wrote:
>> Scott Bennett schrieb:
>> >The latest consensus file appears to have 0.2.0.18-alpha listed as
>> >a recommended server version, but not 0.2.0.16-alpha or 0.2.0.17-alpha,
>> >even though it still lists 0.2.0.11-alpha, 0.2.0.12-alpha, and
>> >0.2.0.15-alpha.  Also, the individual status documents are still in
>> >considerable disagreement with each other.  Are the directory authority
>> >operators getting careless?
>> Mhmm. I think, 16-alpha missed a file in the release and 17-alpha had a 
>> huge memory leak, I think, it is sane no to recommend them.
>
>Right. I dropped 0.2.0.16-alpha and 0.2.0.17-alpha from recommended server
>versions for the reasons you cite. Any server running 0.2.0.17-alpha
>is going to bloat to the point that it endangers other processes on
>the machine.

     Really!  How long does it take to see this leak?  Does the server have
to be doing anything in special (e.g., involved in hidden services, being
a directory mirror) to trigger the leak?  I've been running 0.2.0.17-alpha
since I first noticed in was available, at which time I think it had only
been available for a day or two.  I haven't yet seen the problem.  The
current instance on my machine has been running about 45.5 hours so far.
It appears to be using about 3 MB less right now than it was using around
nine hours ago.  As far as I can recall, its memory usage has been within a
few MB of what it has right now all the time.  It sometimes goes up a little,
and it sometimes goes down a little.  It has never given me cause to suspect
a leak.
>
>There are actually only three v2 authorities that recommend versions:
>moria1, moria2, and tor26. And I believe just two of these (moria1 and
>tor26) are the sole v3 authorities that recommend versions.

     Does that mean that if one goes down, we can't get a majority opinion
on versions?
>
>So Scott, don't worry too much about the "careless" directory operators,
>especially since we haven't ramped up to having more versioning
>authorities yet. Our goal isn't to always keep them perfectly in sync
>anyway -- the goal is to have the majority opinion be a reasonable one.

     Okay.  Thanks for the news.
>
>> 18-alpha is different, but it is quite new, I would not be surprised if it 
>> is recommended not until a few days in the wild, but I don't know the 
>> policy about that.
>
>My Internet is not very good for this week, so I figured I'd push out
>0.2.0.18-alpha (and change recommended versions) before I disappeared. You
>can read its ChangeLog entry if you want a sneak preview; eventually
>I'll send an official announce about it.
>
     Okay.  I just got it late last night and haven't yet had a chance to
do anything with it beyond unpacking it.


                                  Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**********************************************************************
* Internet:       bennett at cs.niu.edu                              *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
* "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good  *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army."                                               *
*    -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790         *
**********************************************************************