Opened 8 years ago
Last modified 21 months ago
#2395 assigned enhancement
Break Wed and Wee weights into two classes each
Reported by: | mikeperry | Owned by: | mikeperry |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Medium | Milestone: | Tor: unspecified |
Component: | Core Tor/Tor | Version: | |
Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | performance loadbalancing tor-client needs-proposal |
Cc: | Actual Points: | ||
Parent ID: | Points: | ||
Reviewer: | Sponsor: |
Description
In 0.2.2, we added consensus bandwidth-weights to specify how to distribute node selection choices for the three positions in a circuit among the different node flags (Guard, Exit, Guard+Exit and None). See 3.4.3 of
https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/doc/spec/dir-spec.txt
and
http://archives.seul.org/or/dev/Sep-2010/msg00016.html. See also the original post:
http://archives.seul.org/or/dev/Jan-2010/msg00012.html
I added some code to statsplitter.py to display the breakdown of bytes by port, using Karsten's extra-info exit ports stats:
Default exit blutmagie read 503.9M
other: 56.6% 80: 38.9% 51413: 1.4% 443: 0.7% 4000: 0.6% 49354: 0.5%
Default exit blutmagie wrote 182.6M
other: 92.1% 80: 4.0% 51413: 1.6% 24273: 1.2% 53163: 0.4% 443: 0.3%
Misc Exit Amunet3 read 206.1M
80: 97.1% 443: 1.6% 8080: 0.6% 81: 0.3% 563: 0.2% other: 0.1%
Misc Exit Amunet3 wrote 7.5M
80: 88.0% 443: 9.0% 8080: 1.3% other: 1.3% 8888: 0.2% 81: 0.1%
Amunet has the non-default exit policy listed in #6 at:
https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tips-running-exit-node-minimal-harassment
Blutmagie has the default.
So what this tells us is that we may want to devote circuits predicted to be used for port 80 or 443 more on the non-default exit policy than for the default exit policy to compensate for the fact that these non-default exits with normally otherwise get less traffic than their default exit policy peers.
Child Tickets
Change History (9)
comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by
comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by
Owner: | set to mikeperry |
---|---|
Status: | new → assigned |
Assigning to 0.2.3.x so it has a milestone.
Mike, how come this ticket doesn't have a point estimate? :)
comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by
Milestone: | → Tor: 0.2.3.x-final |
---|
comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by
Because we're still not sure if we even want to do it. Maybe this becomes less relevant with guard bw throttling?
comment:5 Changed 7 years ago by
Keywords: | performance loadbalancing added |
---|
comment:6 Changed 7 years ago by
Milestone: | Tor: 0.2.3.x-final → Tor: unspecified |
---|
comment:7 Changed 6 years ago by
Keywords: | tor-client added |
---|
comment:8 Changed 6 years ago by
Component: | Tor Client → Tor |
---|
comment:9 Changed 21 months ago by
Keywords: | needs-proposal added |
---|---|
Severity: | → Normal |
One wrinkle that makes this less optimal/more difficult is that we usually are only building circuits with a *guess* as to what the port is, at best, during prediction. It is rare that we're building a circuit for a specific stream...