Re: [tor-bugs] #27571 [Metrics/Website]: Bandwidth values in top relays and relay view

["Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki" <blackhole@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

#27571: Bandwidth values in top relays and relay view
-----------------------------+------------------------------
 Reporter:  juga             |          Owner:  metrics-team
     Type:  defect           |         Status:  closed
 Priority:  Medium           |      Milestone:
Component:  Metrics/Website  |        Version:
 Severity:  Normal           |     Resolution:  not a bug
 Keywords:                   |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:                   |         Points:
 Reviewer:                   |        Sponsor:
-----------------------------+------------------------------
Changes (by irl):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => not a bug


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:2 karsten]:
 > Replying to [ticket:27571 juga]:
 > > Would be easy to add a consensus weight column?
 >
 > I guess so, at least from a data perspective. Unclear whether that would
 make things easier to understand with yet one more column. But I see your
 point that the number that is used for ordering is currently not contained
 in the table.

 There are lots of columns that we could display here, but the view can get
 very crowded very quickly. At some point we should add the ability to
 choose what columns you would like to see and we could make consensus
 weight a default to display in the top relays view but this is going to
 take a big chunk of work to do.

 > > Is it total number shown down left regarding the relays displayed or
 the total regarding the query?
 >
 > I have to guess, but I think it's the total regarding the query. In this
 case it's the total advertised bandwidth of the top 250 relays by
 consensus weight.

 Yes, this is regarding the query. Currently these aggregates must be
 calculated in Relay Search as Onionoo does not provide aggregated queries.

 > > In a relay view [1], consensus weight does not have units, but dir-
 spec says it's in KB [2]. Would be useful to add the unit there?.
 > > Is it took into account that consensus weight values are published in
 KB (not KiB, not B)?
 >
 > Well, dir-spec says it's '''"currently kilobytes per second".''' I don't
 think that adding a unit would add a lot more clarity. It's a weight that
 is only used in comparison to all other weights, so that a unit is not
 necessary.

 Consensus weights themselves are really only used to produce ratios. It is
 convenient if we have a unit we can think and reason about them with, but
 I don't think there is anything in tor that is actually interpreting
 consensus weights directly without considering the total consensus weights
 in the network.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/27571#comment:3>
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