22:59:05 <ahf> #startmeeting network team meeting, 1st of april 2020
22:59:05 <MeetBot> Meeting started Wed Apr  1 22:59:05 2020 UTC.  The chair is ahf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:59:05 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
22:59:20 <ahf> goood morning/afternoon/evening/night network-team!
22:59:37 <ahf> our pad is at https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-2020.1-keep
22:59:41 <ahf> who is here today? :-)
22:59:46 <gaba> o/
22:59:58 <pastly> o/
23:00:17 <catalyst> o/
23:00:23 <ahf> i have a stupid question before we begin. since may 1st is a friday, that means our first network team meeting of may is 29 of april, right?
23:00:48 <ahf> teor told me an algorithm monday for how they calcuate it, but i forgot it and now i think i cannot see it in our trac wiki page
23:02:09 <ahf> added a note in the pad - somebody else who know about this: feel free to update the schedule 8)
23:02:12 <catalyst> "first meeting of the month" is at patch party time, so May 6th, i think?
23:02:31 <catalyst> like we didn't have a meeting on Monday of this week
23:03:02 * teor is here
23:03:07 <ahf> right, so it's not just the week where the 1st is in?
23:03:11 <teor> I don't think we were that specific :-)
23:03:16 <ahf> :-D
23:03:38 <ahf> folks, to try something new while gitlab migration is still ongoing, let's use the trac page for roadmapping here: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam#TicketsforRoadmapQ12020
23:03:39 <teor> you know how good humans are at writing specs :-)
23:03:48 <ahf> then we have less troubles with keeping things in sync
23:03:50 <catalyst> we say "except the first meeting each month", not "except the first Monday each month"
23:05:11 <ahf> oh, confusing - think i'm gonna write to the list or just pick one of them, but then i think it will be may 6
23:05:16 <catalyst> i think Monday April 27, and Wednesday May 6, if we're trying to be consistent
23:05:19 <ahf> are folks doing alright with roadmap?
23:05:22 <ahf> catalyst: i think you are right
23:06:11 <teor> I'll just edit it to say first Wednesday?
23:06:17 <ahf> sounds good, teor
23:06:22 <ahf> thanks
23:06:28 <catalyst> teor: +1
23:06:49 <ahf> hope we don't break anybody's fancy google calendar algorithm for getting this right or something
23:07:30 <ahf> okay, none of asn or dgoulet are around, but i think reviews were delegated the other day
23:08:08 <ahf> let's take a look at 0.4.3: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTorReleases/043Status
23:09:22 * ahf moves #33119 to needs_review
23:10:04 <ahf> does anybody have anything else we need to talk about today? otherwise this is going to be a very short meeting
23:10:08 <ahf> which isn't in itself a bad thing
23:10:22 <ahf> but i see nothing under the discussion items nor anything highlighted on anybodys updates
23:11:10 <catalyst> teor: if you could help with re-checking #33414 about your comments that would be great
23:11:13 <teor> Wow oops I forgot to update
23:11:41 <teor> * the pad
23:11:55 <pastly> Just want to state that I'm on final revision iterations on a flashflow tor proposal
23:11:56 <teor> Sorry about that, I've been spreading myself a bit thin between Sponsor 55, Outreachy, and GSOC
23:12:09 <ahf> teor: ah. no worries. you have something we should talk about here?
23:12:17 <ahf> pastly: cool! is it going out to tor-dev@ then?
23:12:40 <pastly> ahf: either that or the CC army we have going already
23:12:53 <pastly> and who we've left hanging while we write this thing :p
23:13:20 <ahf> i think getting it to tor-dev@ is a good idea once it has bounced around back and forth a bit
23:13:36 <pastly> Whichever idk and idc. Just want to get the writing off my plate and get some coding on it done.
23:13:37 <ahf> there are volunteers there that might be curious about it and jump in - it sometimes happens :-)
23:13:42 <ahf> yep
23:13:44 <pastly> So the CC cabal first?
23:14:00 <teor> I like reading proposals, but I don't know when I'll have time
23:14:07 <ahf> CC cabal in my world is the community council
23:14:14 <ahf> but i assume you mean whoever is in your cc on the mail right now
23:14:33 <pastly> good assumption. started with mikeperry and then I think arma2 CCed a bunch of people
23:14:35 <ahf> i think it's fine to discuss things internally first before publishing, but i think it should go to tor-dev@ - that is where people look for this
23:15:26 <teor> I have some tickets I'd like help prioritising
23:15:35 <ahf> teor: let's do that!
23:15:36 <ahf> which ones?
23:15:43 <teor> I'd like to take #30901 off the roadmap, it's not urgent any more
23:16:01 <teor> Until we run into a stem/tor bug, then it will be urgent again :-)
23:16:52 <ahf> gaba: what is the right procedure to take something off the roadmap with the keywords on trac?
23:17:08 <ahf> if we think of our conversatoin last week with keeping trac in sync as focus instead of GL board?
23:17:24 <ahf> i assume it's to rename the keyword to something else
23:17:34 <ahf> teor: to me it sounds fine
23:18:00 <teor> Done!
23:18:06 <teor> I put #33768 in Sponsor 55, but I'd also be happy if we decided it was more critical
23:18:58 <teor> tor_inet_pton() leaves different data in the IPv6 address on failure on Windows and macOS/Linux, which is disturbing
23:19:08 <ahf> hm, yeah, doesn't seem critical. odd bug though
23:19:09 <ahf> yeah
23:19:40 <teor> Could be a Windows client distinguisher, might also cause crashes or data corruption if we don't check the return value
23:19:40 <ahf> teor: let's take those two off, and then i can look at updating the right spreadsheets and such after the meeting
23:20:03 <teor> Oh I was suggesting increasing the priority for #33768
23:20:19 <ahf> ohh, sorry, i read it as "if we decided it was not critical" sorry
23:21:10 <ahf> if it's under s55-must then i think that is good? i think if we need to prioritize it we need to compare it against the rest of the tickets there?
23:21:38 <teor> I think it's fine, we always check the return value at the moment
23:21:49 <ahf> ok, good
23:22:19 <teor> Also #33781 is weird, I put it in 044-should
23:23:06 <ahf> yeah, i saw that one mentioned on IRC earlier today
23:23:13 <teor> Looks like tor can make extra-info descriptors with CR LF lines
23:23:45 <ahf> yeah, it's strange. maybe it's an CR that doesn't get stripped before being put into the file and then get the LF
23:24:14 <ahf> err, other way around
23:24:27 <teor> Yeah, might also be a Windows to Linux transition thing
23:24:34 <ahf> yeah
23:25:12 <ahf> it would probably be "easy" to check with stem for historical times where this has happened
23:25:21 <ahf> to detect if CR's appear every now and then
23:26:33 <teor> Oh #33757 is also a weird bug. (This is what happens when I read mailing lists, I collect bugs.)
23:27:25 <teor> Tor logs a warning about a Bug in the config code, which isn't true
23:27:35 <ahf> i didn't even know we had logic to check if the other pid is still running
23:27:36 <ahf> clever
23:27:43 <teor> Yeah lock files
23:27:57 <ahf> but yeah, the bug line seems a bit without purpose there
23:28:18 <teor> I expect nickm will have a better idea, because he did the config refector
23:28:25 <ahf> yep
23:29:38 <ahf> okay, should we call the meeting off or do we have more things to add? i think we still have some votes ongoing that are missing some votes, but i haven't had a chance to see what is missing. gonna look at that before next week
23:30:19 <catalyst> i'm fine for now
23:30:28 <teor> I';m good
23:30:31 <ahf> cool
23:30:40 <ahf> thanks folks, hope you have a day o/
23:30:42 <ahf> #endmeeting