Re: vanishing HSDIR flags

[Scott Bennett <bennett@xxxxxxxxxx>]

     On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 15:43:38 +0200 Sebastian Hahn <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>On Aug 21, 2010, at 3:35 PM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>> Hi Sebastian,
>>     Thanks for responding.
>>     On  Sat, 21 Aug 2010 15:17:19 +0200 Sebastian Hahn <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>> >
>>> wrote:
>>> On Aug 21, 2010, at 1:49 PM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>>>
>>>>    Yesterday (Friday) the number of relays given HSDir flags by the
>>>> directory authorities was reduced by a bit more than 50% from only a
>>>> day earlier.  My node, MYCROFTsOtherChild, was and still is among  
>>>> the
>>>> bereft.  This same situation happened a couple of weeks ago, also
>>>> affecting my node.  That time the flag reappeared several hours  
>>>> after
>>>> I first noticed what had happened.  This time the flag is still
>>>> missing.
>>>>    It is not obvious to me why the HSDir flag has been stripped from
>>>> so many relays, especially relays that have, like mine, been up and
>>>> running for weeks since the last restart.  Has a bug been  
>>>> triggered in
>>>> the authority code?
>>>
>>> Apparently enough authorities have upgraded to 0.2.2.15-alpha. See
>>> the changelog for details.
>>>
>>     Yes, I see that entry now in the Changelog, although I don't see  
>> the
>> reasoning behind it.  HSDir requests differ in just about every  
>> imaginable
>> way from ordinary directory requests.  The protocol is different, the
>> HSDir entry format is different, the request frequency is lower by  
>> orders
>> of magnitude, the requests are--or at least as I recall--intended to  
>> be
>> handled over internal circuits rather than via a DirPort, and so  
>> on.  I
>> just don't see any reason to tie the HSDir service to the presence/ 
>> absence
>> of a DirPort.
>>     Also, given the switch from decentralized traffic distribution to
>> centralized traffic distribution in recent tor versions, nodes  
>> advertising
>> throughput capacities of, say, 49 KB/s or less (I don't really know  
>> where
>> the curve becomes steeper) get little use already.  Given that  
>> DirPort is
>> ignored when the advertised throughput capacity is less than 50 KB/ 
>> s, tying
>> HSDir service to the presence/absence of an active DirPort means that
>> relatively unused relays cannot even help out with handling the  
>> trivial
>> traffic volume of HSDir requests.  Doesn't that seem rather  
>> counterproductive?
>
>The issue is that there is a bug in relays that checks for the DirPort  
>to
>be enabled before it answer directory requests, including hsdir

    How weird!  HSDir is a completely different service.  It's also
strange to read this because I have watched my node (at < 48 KB/s)
appear to answer some (according to the info-level log) and respond
to others that it couldn't find the requested information.  In short,
it seemed to be working properly when it had the HSDir flag assigned.
(I'm running 0.2.2.14-alpha.)

>stuff. Before a complete fix for that is developed, the short-term
>workaround to make hidden services more stable is to make remove
>the nodes without a dirport from the dht. As soon as a fix is
>developed, the authorities can start assigning the flag again based on
>Tor version.
>
     Okay.  Thanks for clearing that up for me.


                                  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         *
**********************************************************************