A. Johnson <aaron.m.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> This proposal doubles the default number of IPs and reduces the âcost" >> of being an IP since the probability of being selected is no longer >> bandwidth-weighted. Is this a fair tradeoff for the performance >> improvement? > > That seems easy to fix. Make the number of Introduction Points the same as > it was before and make them be selected in a bandwidth-weight way. There > is no cost to this. You need IPs to be online, and so whatever number was > used in the past will yield the same availability now. And > bandwidth-weighting should actually improve both performance and security. I think bandwidth weight isn't appropriate for this. If we think the cost of running a HSDir(+IP) is too low, we should increase that directly. This is a good case where we can benefit from the many honest-but-not-well-funded relays. Concentrating even more traffic and information onto the highest-bandwidth relays isnât an improvement. - John > > > Aaron > > _______________________________________________ > tor-dev mailing list > tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev