Hello Tor developers,

I am interested in becoming an open source contributor for Tor, but I don't
know where to start some guidance would be appreciated.

Thank you,

On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 8:00 AM, <tor-dev-requ...@lists.torproject.org>
wrote:

> Send tor-dev mailing list submissions to
>         tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         tor-dev-requ...@lists.torproject.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         tor-dev-ow...@lists.torproject.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of tor-dev digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Proposal 281: downloading microdescriptors in bulk
>       (Nick Mathewson)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 13:36:00 -0400
> From: Nick Mathewson <ni...@torproject.org>
> To: tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
> Subject: [tor-dev] Proposal 281: downloading microdescriptors in bulk
> Message-ID:
>         <CAKDKvux=eJBh_JsEeiqnhbEbcgRVeMRrbm2G7itZ8kX
> y4+m...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Filename: 281-bulk-md-download.txt
> Title: Downloading microdescriptors in bulk
> Author: Nick Mathewson
> Created: 11-Aug-2017
> Status: Draft
>
> 1. Introduction
>
>   This proposal describes a ways to download more microdescriptors
>   at a time, using fewer bytes.
>
>   Right now, to download N microdescriptors, the client must send
>   about 44*N bytes in its HTTP request.  Because clients can request
>   microdescriptors in any combination, the directory caches cannot
>   pre-compress responses to these requests, and need to use less
>   space-efficient on-the-fly compression algorithms.
>
>   Under this proposal, clients simply say "Send me the
>   microdescriptors I need", given what I know.
>
> 2. Combined microdescriptor downloads
>
> 2.1. By diff
>
>   If a client has a consensus with base64 sha3-256 digest X, and it
>   previously had a consensus with base64 sha3-256 digests Y then
>   it may request all the microdescriptors listed in X but not Y,
>   by asking for the resource:
>       /tor/micro/diff/X/Y
>
>   Clients SHOULD only ask for this resource compressed.
>
>   Caches MUST NOT answer this request unless they recognize the
>   consensus with digest X, and digest Y.
>   digest Y.  If answering, caches MUST reply with all of the
>   microdescriptors that the cache holds that were listed by
>   consensus X, and MUST omit all the microdescriptors that were
>   omitted listed in consensus Y.
>
> 2.2. By consensus:
>
>   If a client has fewer than NMNM% of the microdescriptors listed in a
>   consensus X, it should fetch the resource
>       /tor/micro/full/X
>
>   Clients SHOULD only ask for this resource compressed.
>
>   Caches MUST NOT answer this request unless they recognize the
>   consensus with digest X. They should send all the microdescriptors
>   they have that are listed in that consensus.
>
> 2.3. When to make these requests
>
>   Clients should decide to use this format in preference to the
>   old download-by-digest format if the consensus X lists their
>   preferred directory cache as using a new DirCache subprotocol
>   version. (See 5 below.)
>
> 3. Performance analysis
>
>   This is a back-of-the-envelope analysis using a month's worth of
>   consensus documents, and a randomly chosen sample of
>   microdescriptors.
>
>
>   On average, about 0.5% of the microdescriptors change between any
>   two consensuses.  Call it 50.  That means 50*43 bytes == 2150
>   bytes to request the microdescriptors.  It means ~24530 bytes of
>   microdescriptors downloaded, compressed to ~13687 bytes by zstd.
>
>   With this proposal, we're down to 86 bytes for the request, and we
>   can precompute the compressed output, making it save to use lzma2,
>   getting a compressed result more like 13362.
>
>   It appears that this change would save about 15% for incremental
>   microdescriptor downloads, most of that coming from the reduction
>   in request size.
>
>   For complete downloads, a complete set of microdescriptors is about
>   7700 microdesciptors long.  That makes the total number of bytes
>   for the requests 7700*43 == 331100 bytes.  The response, if
>   compressed with lzma instead of zstd, would fall from 1659682 to
>   1587804 bytes, for a total savings of 20%.
>
>
> 5. Compatibility
>
>    Caches supporting this download protocol need to advertise
>    support of a new DirCache subprotocol version.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> tor-dev mailing list
> tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of tor-dev Digest, Vol 79, Issue 4
> **************************************
>
_______________________________________________
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev

Reply via email to