Opened 19 months ago

Closed 19 months ago

Last modified 18 months ago

#24287 closed enhancement (fixed)

Add a "votes for IPv6 ORPorts" flag to authorities in consensus health summary

Reported by: teor Owned by: tom
Priority: Medium Milestone:
Component: Metrics/Consensus Health Version:
Severity: Normal Keywords:
Cc: Actual Points:
Parent ID: Points:
Reviewer: Sponsor:

Description

We'd like to know which authorities vote for IPv6 addresses. It could be near or in the known flags table.

We'd also like to know how many IPv6 addresses they are each voting for, like the existing Overlap between vote and consensus table. It could even be in that table.

Child Tickets

Change History (7)

comment:1 Changed 19 months ago by tom

Should be easy to add, once I figure out how to detect it. How is it exposed in the vote? Is there any flag or anything I can look for or do i just need to look for a relay that has a v6 port?

comment:2 Changed 19 months ago by teor

If an authority's vote for a relay has an "a" line with an IPv6 address, the relay should get the "ReachableIPv6" pseudo-flag from that authority.

If an authority's vote contains any "a" lines with IPv6 addresses, the authority should be marked as knowing the "ReachableIPv6" pseudo-flag.

(The IPv6 address check isn't needed yet, because the only addresses in "a" lines are IPv6 addresses.)

comment:3 Changed 19 months ago by teor

Oh, and do you have access to relay descriptors in consensus-health?
If you do, a feature like OnionOO's #21637 (which will show unreachable addresses on RelaySearch/Atlas) would be great:

If a relay declares an IPv6 address in its descriptor (in an "a" line), but an authority doesn't vote for that IPv6 address via an "a" line, that relay should get the UnreachableIPv6 pseudo-flag from that authority. Hmm, actually, what happens here is that the authority doesn't vote Running for that relay, either. Are non-Running still in votes?

If an authority's vote contains any "a" lines with IPv6 addresses, the authority should be marked as knowing the "ReachableIPv6" and "UnreachableIPv6" pseudo-flags.

Edit: clarify the unreachable flag

Last edited 19 months ago by teor (previous) (diff)

comment:4 in reply to:  3 Changed 19 months ago by tom

Replying to teor:

Oh, and do you have access to relay descriptors in consensus-health?

I don't. I've resisted trying to add them because I think it will significantly increase the runtime and memory requirements of the script. (And as it is the script sometimes fails due to OOM)

comment:6 Changed 19 months ago by tom

Resolution: fixed
Status: newclosed

Feel free to open a new ticket to track the UnReachable flag, but I don't think I'll wind up addressing it soon.

comment:7 Changed 18 months ago by teor

Thanks. I split off UnreachableIPv6 into #24344. I understand if it never gets done.
(And that's ok: the absence of ReachableIPv6 is almost equivalent.)

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.