[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
[tor-talk] Consensus Balance? (was Re: [tor-consensus-health] Consensus issues)
02.07.2016, 03:37 Roger Dingledine:
> On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 01:08:06AM +0000, atagar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> NOTICE: Consensus fetched from maatuska was missing the following authority signatures: Faravahar
> This one is expected -- we have begun the shift to migrate away from
First, I am unaware how this dance takes place. It seems to be the case
that 'Faravahar' has a different understanding of who is a authority and
who is not, but why would it not sign the consensus from 'maatuska'?
Second, since there will be a number of authorities that is divisible by
two it seems that there could be situations where ties would occur
during the voting process. IIRC you've always preferred to avoid that,
so either 'urras' gets replaced or another authority gets nocked down.
(E.g. less people that have to be trusted.) What's your plan? Is there a
ticket where this is tracked?
Poor 'urras' seemed to have and seems to have trouble:
>>> NOTICE: Downloading the consensus from urras took 121.2s (...)
This is likely one of the reasons why you are migrating away from it.
>>> WARNING: The consensuses published by the following directory
authorities are more than one hour old and therefore not fresh anymore:
an awful lot, so it could be a candidate for an authority to get rid of,
if 'urras' is not replaced.
>> WARNING: The consensuses published by the following directory authorities are more than one hour old and therefore not fresh anymore: Faravahar
> This one is exciting. Does this mean that Faravahar is stubbornly clinging
> to the last consensus that it agreed with, rather than trying to fetch
> (and then serve) a newer consensus that has enough sigs?
> Fun times,
We exist in interesting times,
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to