[or-cvs] [tor/master] Add proposal 161: computing bandwidth adjustments
Nick Mathewson
nickm at seul.org
Wed May 13 03:00:08 UTC 2009
Author: Nick Mathewson <nickm at torproject.org>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 23:00:05 -0400
Subject: Add proposal 161: computing bandwidth adjustments
Commit: ce768fc06e093da114ddfebfc2400c47115c2c38
---
doc/spec/proposals/000-index.txt | 2 +
.../161-computing-bandwidth-adjustments.txt | 115 ++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 117 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 doc/spec/proposals/161-computing-bandwidth-adjustments.txt
diff --git a/doc/spec/proposals/000-index.txt b/doc/spec/proposals/000-index.txt
index d54d5a2..efc418c 100644
--- a/doc/spec/proposals/000-index.txt
+++ b/doc/spec/proposals/000-index.txt
@@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ Proposals by number:
158 Clients download consensus + microdescriptors [OPEN]
159 Exit Scanning [OPEN]
160 Authorities vote for bandwidth offsets in consensus [OPEN]
+161 Computing Bandwidth Adjustments [OPEN]
Proposals by status:
@@ -103,6 +104,7 @@ Proposals by status:
158 Clients download consensus + microdescriptors
159 Exit Scanning
160 Authorities vote for bandwidth offsets in consensus [for 0.2.2.x]
+ 161 Computing Bandwidth Adjustments [for 0.2.2.x]
ACCEPTED:
110 Avoiding infinite length circuits [for 0.2.1.x] [in 0.2.1.3-alpha]
117 IPv6 exits [for 0.2.1.x]
diff --git a/doc/spec/proposals/161-computing-bandwidth-adjustments.txt b/doc/spec/proposals/161-computing-bandwidth-adjustments.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e64a35b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/spec/proposals/161-computing-bandwidth-adjustments.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
+Title: Computing Bandwidth Adjustments
+Filename: 161-computing-bandwidth-adjustments.txt
+Author: Mike Perry
+Created: 12-May-2009
+Target: 0.2.2.x
+Status: Open
+
+
+1. Motivation
+
+ There is high variance in the performance of the Tor network. Despite
+ our efforts to balance load evenly across the Tor nodes, some nodes are
+ significantly slower and more overloaded than others.
+
+ Proposal 160 describes how we can augment the directory authorities to
+ vote on measured bandwidths for routers. This proposal describes what
+ goes into the measuring process.
+
+
+2. Measurement Selection
+
+ The general idea is to determine a load factor representing the ratio
+ of the capacity of measured nodes to the rest of the network. This load
+ factor could be computed from three potentially relevant statistics:
+ circuit failure rates, circuit extend times, or stream capacity.
+
+ Circuit failure rates and circuit extend times appear to be
+ non-linearly proportional to node load. We've observed that the same
+ nodes when scanned at US nighttime hours (when load is presumably
+ lower) exhibit almost no circuit failure, and significantly faster
+ extend times than when scanned during the day.
+
+ Stream capacity, however, is much more uniform, even during US
+ nighttime hours. Moreover, it is a more intuitive representation of
+ node capacity, and also less dependent upon distance and latency
+ if amortized over large stream fetches.
+
+
+2. Average Stream Bandwidth Calculation
+
+ The average stream bandwidths are obtained by dividing the network
+ into 3% slices according to advertised node bandwidth, yielding
+ about 45 nodes per slice in the current network.
+
+ Two hop circuits are built using nodes from the same slice, and a large
+ file is downloaded via these circuits. This process is repeated
+ several hundred times, and average stream capacities are assigned to
+ each node from these results.
+
+
+3. Ratio Calculation Options
+
+ There are two options for deriving the ratios themselves. They can
+ be obtained by dividing each nodes' average stream capacity by
+ either the average for the slice, or the average for the network as a
+ whole.
+
+ Dividing by the network-wide average has the advantage that it will
+ account for issues related to unbalancing between higher vs lower
+ capacity, such as Steven Murdoch's queuing theory weighting result.
+
+ Dividing by the slice average has the advantage that many scans can
+ be run in parallel from a single authority, and that results are
+ typically available sooner after a given scan takes place.
+
+
+3. Ratio Filtering
+
+ After the base ratios are calculated, a second pass is performed
+ to remove any streams with nodes of ratios less than X=0.5 from
+ the results of other nodes. In addition, all outlying streams
+ with capacity of one standard deviation below a node's average
+ are also removed.
+
+ The final ratio result will be calculated as the maximum of
+ these two resulting ratios if both are less than 1.0, the minimum
+ if both are greater than 1.0, and the mean if one is greater
+ and one is less than 1.0.
+
+
+4. Security implications
+
+ The ratio filtering will deal with cases of sabotage by dropping
+ both very slow outliers in stream average calculations, as well
+ as dropping streams that used very slow nodes from the calculation
+ of other nodes.
+
+ This scheme will not address nodes that try to game the system by
+ providing better service to scanners. The scanners can be detected
+ at the entry by IP address, and at the exit by the destination fetch.
+
+ Measures can be taken to obfuscate and separate the scanners' source
+ IP address from the directory authority IP address. For instance,
+ scans can happen offsite and the results can be rsynced into the
+ authorities. The destination fetch can also be obscured by using SSL
+ and periodically changing the large document that is fetched.
+
+ Neither of these methods are foolproof, but such nodes can already
+ lie about their bandwidth to attract more traffic, so this solution
+ does not set us back any in that regard.
+
+
+4. Integration with Proposal 160
+
+ The final results will be produced for the voting mechanism
+ described in Proposal 160 by multiplying the derived ratio by
+ the average observed advertised bandwidth during the course of the
+ scan. This will produce a new bandwidth value that will be
+ output into a file consisting of lines of the form:
+
+ <node-idhex> SP new_bandwidth NL
+
+ This file can be either copied or rsynced into a directory readable
+ by the directory authority.
+
--
1.5.6.5
More information about the tor-commits
mailing list