[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #2286 [Tor Directory Authority]: We still use self-published relay bandwidth sometimes
#2286: We still use self-published relay bandwidth sometimes
-------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
Reporter: arma | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: Tor: 0.2.3.x-final
Component: Tor Directory Authority | Version:
Keywords: arma-cares | Parent:
Points: | Actualpoints:
-------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
Comment(by mikeperry):
Replying to [comment:29 nickm]:
> Mike, assuming that we're going to do _something_ so that the output of
the consensus changes here such that nodes can't get high bandwidth in
the consensus when they're not measured -- what *would* work to keep
measurements happy?
I think some way to explicitly say that a relay has not been measured is
the best plan. I think a new consensus method with "Capped=1" could be
workable. Patching the bandwidth authorities for that shouldn't be
terribly hard, I think (though I am speaking from memory here).
To bikeshed a little: Maybe Capped is the wrong keyword. We have other
bandwidth caps we used to do, and we may want to cap in the other
direction for other reasons.. Perhaps just Unmeasured=1 instead?
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/2286#comment:30>
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