14:33:28 #startmeeting metrics team 14:33:28 Meeting started Thu Apr 5 14:33:28 2018 UTC. The chair is karsten. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:33:28 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 14:33:45 https://storm.torproject.org/shared/5h1Goax5eNusxjXJ_Ty5Wl7hFR1uqCReUiN8xdlBG8T <- agenda pad 14:35:28 no more topics to add from me 14:35:30 hi there! 14:35:33 hi! 14:35:34 hi iwakeh! 14:35:35 me neither. 14:35:40 okay, great! 14:35:45 let's start then. 14:35:51 * March report (karsten) 14:35:57 I put the draft on the pad. 14:36:05 want to take a look and see what's missing/unclear? 14:36:17 we should add tomorrow's release 14:36:26 not in march anymore. 14:36:34 it will go into the next report. 14:36:42 true. 14:36:48 * iwakeh ahead of time :-) 14:36:56 err behind. 14:38:08 i added the ticket for the atom feed, and changed the other ticket to use bugs.tpo instead of trac.tpo 14:38:16 which was a convention used by tor weekly news 14:38:25 oh, okay. 14:38:28 sure, sounds good. 14:39:02 i think those are all the changes from me 14:39:48 okay. iwakeh, anything you think needs changing? 14:40:51 still here? 14:41:08 all fine. 14:41:10 ok! 14:41:27 should I wait with sending out this report, or can it go as is? 14:41:33 after this meeting, that is. 14:41:38 i don't think there is need to wait 14:42:09 That'll be fine. 14:42:14 alright. will send it out then. 14:42:19 * Roadmap update April 1 (karsten) 14:42:26 see pad. 14:42:37 I started going through the list of open goals. 14:42:42 and added notes. 14:43:19 please add yours. focus is what percentage done we can write by april 1. 14:44:33 another aspect is which goals we'd drop first if we realize we're running out of time. 14:46:41 percentages seem ok to me 14:47:03 ok. 14:48:20 ok, i've commented on all the goals that i feel qualified to comment on 14:48:30 great! 14:48:43 so, I'll update the wiki after the meeting. 14:48:57 moving on? 14:49:04 ok 14:49:10 ok 14:49:13 * Adding irl to groups (karsten) 14:49:21 this is about running services. 14:49:35 so ldap groups? 14:49:37 given that we meet next week, should I ask you to be added to groups now? 14:49:52 yes. collector, metrics, onionoo, exonerator. 14:49:57 ok, yes, this sounds sensible 14:50:20 for now it wouldn't mean taking over a service, but it would enable you to look. 14:50:24 iwakeh: does that make sense? 14:50:41 yes 14:50:50 okay. 14:51:23 speaking of, 14:51:24 * Aberdeen meeting preparation (karsten) 14:51:32 what else should we prepare? 14:51:50 i've requested a meeting room for the two afternoons 14:52:07 do you have eduroam credentials or should i also get a wifi account? 14:52:22 I don't have such a thing. 14:52:30 so, yes, a wifi account would be good. 14:52:32 ok, i'll get you some temporary eduroam credentials too then 14:52:37 great! 14:52:44 the room will have power sockets and chairs 14:52:49 is there anything else we need? 14:52:50 can you send me the address and time? 14:52:58 heh, a converter. 14:53:01 (I have one.) 14:53:02 we have those 14:53:06 oh, great. 14:53:16 no, I think that's good then. 14:53:28 ok, i can send you the address/time by email 14:53:34 yep. 14:53:37 but it will be one of the university campuses 14:53:53 (it may be one day on each) 14:53:59 sure. 14:54:01 oh 14:54:04 do you need parking? 14:54:07 yes. 14:54:13 ok, i will arrange visitor parking too then 14:54:23 perfect! 14:54:46 updated the pad 14:54:56 great! moving on? 14:55:07 ok 14:55:11 * Onionoo 5.2 release (karsten) 14:55:28 iwakeh: I updated #25700. 14:55:37 which is, I think, the last remaining ticket. 14:55:54 once that is in I can prepare the release. 14:55:55 ok, I'm reviewing 25712 14:55:58 too 14:56:17 okay. 14:56:44 so, we're on schedule for releasing tomorrow? 14:56:50 what time did we say again? 14:56:56 for deploying? 14:56:58 yep, seems like it :-) 14:57:08 12UTC? 14:57:22 or maybe 11:50 UTC? 14:57:35 should work. 14:57:41 just because that gives us a bit more time until :15. 14:57:43 okay. 14:58:21 great! 14:58:28 last topic on the list: 14:58:32 * An "Is my relay running correctly?" service (irl) 14:58:49 based on the number of times this question is asked on #tor, i think we should automate this 14:59:05 how is that different from relay search? 14:59:13 usually what happens is arma is looking up in his dirauth whether or not it's seen a descriptor and is reachable 14:59:17 arma does not scale 14:59:27 it's different because it's instant feedback 14:59:44 an initial version maybe just does a tls handshake and is happy with it 15:00:00 a better version does begindir and fetches a descriptor, tests ipv6 and suggests filling in a contact line if not present 15:00:18 this is going to be a new ideas ticket, so i just wanted to raise it here first before filing it in case there were more ideas 15:00:40 so, we offer a service that makes connections to relays. 15:00:44 yes 15:00:55 does it first check whether the provided IP address is a relay? 15:00:59 no 15:01:06 because it's meant to be used to diagnose faults 15:01:12 can that be exploited? 15:01:28 https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=at-tor-1.erg.abdn.ac.uk&s=139.133.232.231&ignoreMismatch=on&latest 15:01:35 there are already services that will make connections 15:01:44 this is what gave me the idea 15:01:51 we would need to put rate limits in though 15:02:21 if it doesn't to tls we would abort, if it's not a tor relay when we connect we would abort 15:02:25 or can we answer this by using more recent tor data? 15:02:57 wait for another consensus? 15:02:59 like, by asking the dirauths if they know about a server. 15:03:14 we could do that, but it won't diagnose faults 15:03:16 that's less instant, but yes. 15:03:31 e.g. ipv6 advertised in descriptor but it's firewalled 15:03:36 well, people could be nformed abot that. 15:03:39 so it never goes into the consensus 15:04:07 no, but the descriptor might be there. 15:04:27 we could check that too, but i think that would be a complimentary check as opposed to a replacement 15:04:40 almost every day i see these questions in #tor 15:04:45 okay, this sounds like a fine ideas ticket. 15:04:54 (i get highlighted on mentions of atlas, so i get to see them all) 15:04:57 but I'm concerned about making requests triggered by users. 15:04:59 I think people can be warded off, for a few hours. 15:05:15 if that is documented in tor and communicated. 15:05:48 maybe we can answer some of these questions by explaining better (on relay search) what we checked by looking at descriptors and what we found out. 15:06:06 also, maybe votes tell us more here. 15:06:11 that's also a good option, 15:06:15 votes would be very useful 15:06:40 most likely only the minority of relay operators-to-be ask on irc. 15:07:23 we should probably improve the "no such relay" page on relay search to point to the community portal documentation once it exists 15:07:27 on how to debug your relay 15:07:37 yes, sounds good. 15:08:15 ok, i'll turn all this into a ticket then 15:08:21 thank you! 15:08:28 it's good to turn this feedback into ideas. 15:08:38 feedback from relay operators, that is. 15:08:54 alright. out of topics! 15:09:10 oh 15:09:15 oh! 15:09:25 * Metrics/Analysis Tickets (irl) 15:09:36 right. 15:09:56 see also https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/6473#comment:7 15:10:04 you may have noticed i did some triage on the tickets 15:10:09 made sure metrics-team was cc and such 15:10:26 noticed that about cc, not sure about analysis tickets. 15:10:32 these two tickets were owned by arma 15:10:37 I usually only see tickets that have metrics-team in cc. 15:11:04 i think we have two kinds of tickets in metrics/analysis 15:11:16 there are vague research ideas and then tasks that metrics can help with 15:11:37 i suggested to arma that we might split this component and make a new research component that might contain open questions 15:11:45 sounds like a great plan. 15:11:50 or just close these tickets and maybe move the better open questions to the research portal 15:11:55 as trac isn't really the best place for them 15:12:03 also an option, if we do that second step. 15:12:06 these are more likely to be answered by external researchers 15:12:19 does the research portal exist? 15:12:28 or what's the timeline there? 15:12:29 http://research.torproject.org/ 15:12:32 ahh. 15:12:41 so it exists as that 15:12:47 and there is an ideas page 15:12:49 weren't there plans to make an actual research portal? 15:12:58 that website is not updated very often. 15:13:03 true. 15:13:07 (read as: never) 15:13:14 even more true 15:13:42 it's a static site, once the other portals are up i guess it's really easy to migrate it to lektor 15:14:00 but, we could start with plan A (split components) and do plan B (move to research portal) as soon as that exists. 15:14:24 ok, where do you think is the best place to discuss this? 15:14:33 or do i just do it? 15:14:41 where would that new component live? 15:14:51 Core Tor? 15:14:51 "Research/Open Questions" probably 15:15:05 they're not core tor 15:15:31 well, nobody will feel responsible for a new top-level component Research. 15:15:39 unless somebody says they will. 15:16:32 I'm not sure where to put it. 15:16:34 there is the same problem moving it to core tor though 15:16:46 yes, we'd have to talk to the network team first in that case. 15:16:52 maybe we should do that in any case. 15:16:55 i will check on the timeline for the research portal and see what exists there already 15:16:57 maybe there are plans 15:17:04 also a good plan. 15:17:09 and a sub-component of Metrics/Analytics ? 15:17:18 fr sorting 15:17:20 sub-sub? 15:17:31 might be a trac limit. 15:17:31 for sorting, just pick Metrics/Research ? 15:17:36 they're not really analysis at all 15:17:46 hmm, this yields something different. 15:17:49 they're "it would be good if arma would write a paper on X" tickets 15:18:42 so, do you need such a Metrics/Something component for the sorting? 15:18:46 I can create one. 15:18:54 (maybe you can, too.) 15:18:57 let's leave them where they are for now 15:19:03 okay. 15:19:08 no point in moving them twice 15:19:16 maybe tag? 15:19:37 now, that you read through them already? 15:19:42 research-ideas would be a good tag 15:19:46 i can do this 15:19:59 that'll safe time when moving is possible. 15:20:05 yep, good idea 15:20:05 great! 15:20:21 out of topics? 15:20:23 :) 15:20:27 for real this time (: 15:20:34 oh 15:20:36 kay 15:20:40 :) 15:20:41 heh 15:20:44 by the way, let's skip next week's meeting. 15:20:48 heh 15:20:53 ok cool 15:21:03 ok 15:21:26 that's all then! 15:21:37 thanks, and bye, bye! :) 15:21:41 bye, bye! 15:21:41 bye! 15:21:47 #endmeeting