Re: [tor-bugs] #30174 [Core Tor/sbws]: possible SBWS measurement quality regression

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#30174: possible SBWS measurement quality regression
---+---
 Reporter:  starlight  |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect | Status:  needs_information
 Priority:  Medium |  Milestone:  sbws: 1.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/sbws  |Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal | Resolution:
 Keywords: |  Actual Points:
Parent ID: | Points:
 Reviewer: |Sponsor:
---+---
Changes (by teor):

 * milestone:  sbws: unspecified => sbws: 1.2.x-final


--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #30174 [Core Tor/sbws]: possible SBWS measurement quality regression

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#30174: possible SBWS measurement quality regression
---+---
 Reporter:  starlight  |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect | Status:  needs_information
 Priority:  Medium |  Milestone:  sbws: unspecified
Component:  Core Tor/sbws  |Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal | Resolution:
 Keywords: |  Actual Points:
Parent ID: | Points:
 Reviewer: |Sponsor:
---+---

Comment (by starlight):

 According to the vote document it's "software_version=1.1.0", what I say
 above in the description (which you copy in reply), is the current git
 release and you posted about it on tor-relays.  This ticket is under SBWS
 so what doubt inspires the scanner/version question?

 The out-of-whack numbers I observed reverted--SBWS requires a substantial
 ramp-up time before quality is achieved.  Torflow has an explicit
 mechanism to delay publishing until equilibrium is present, suggest that
 SBWS employ something similar.

 My recommendation is to examine raw votes in comparison to the POC scanner
 Matt authored as a QA validation.  I still like the idea, even with the
 vote quality improvement.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #30174 [Core Tor/sbws]: possible SBWS measurement quality regression

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#30174: possible SBWS measurement quality regression
---+---
 Reporter:  starlight  |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect | Status:  needs_information
 Priority:  Medium |  Milestone:  sbws: unspecified
Component:  Core Tor/sbws  |Version:  sbws: 1.1.0
 Severity:  Normal | Resolution:
 Keywords: |  Actual Points:
Parent ID: | Points:
 Reviewer: |Sponsor:
---+---
Changes (by juga):

 * status:  new => needs_information
 * version:   => sbws: 1.1.0
 * milestone:   => sbws: unspecified


Comment:

 Hi starlight,

 Thanks for reporting this.

 Replying to [ticket:30174 starlight]:
 > With the release of v1.1 to longclaw seeing evidence of measurement
 quality degradation, regression.  > Have not had time to work up an
 analysis.
 If you have time it would be great to know:
 - respect to which scanner and version you see degradation and regression
 - where/how do you see that

 > Recommend running Matt's original scanner and comparing raw bandwidth
 results.
 - which is Matt's original scanner. I guess you mean sbws < 1.x.x?. Most
 of the changes respect to previous versions have been done on the scaling
 part, not the measuring one.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

[tor-bugs] #30174 [Core Tor/sbws]: possible SBWS measurement quality regression

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#30174: possible SBWS measurement quality regression
---+---
 Reporter:  starlight  |  Owner:  (none)
 Type:  defect | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium |  Component:  Core Tor/sbws
  Version: |   Severity:  Normal
 Keywords: |  Actual Points:
Parent ID: | Points:
 Reviewer: |Sponsor:
---+---
 With the release of v1.1 to longclaw seeing evidence of measurement
 quality degradation, regression.  Have not had time to work up an
 analysis.

 Recommend running Matt's original scanner and comparing raw bandwidth
 results.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs