[tor-dev] Bi-directional families in Onionoo and consensus weight as measure of relayed bandwidth

[Virgil Griffith]

One proposal I've liked is to socially discourage asymmetrical families by
giving them with bad badges on Roster.  If A says B is part of their family
but B doesn't reciprocate, A gets a penalty to their bandwidth points.

I think right now the proposals are to either:

(1) move forward using Observed Bandwidth for everything.  And when it gets
spoofed we must accept it and can talk about ways of improving it.

(2) use consensus weight as a proxy for "real observed bandwidth".

Question: What is the downside (if any), of using Consensus Weight as the
sole measure of bandwidth points?

-V

On Thursday, July 2, 2015, l.m <ter.one.leeboi at hush.com> wrote:

> The major problem with ticket 16276 is that it isn't a fix (as you seek
> here). It just moves the current implementation into the details document
> rather than being done in the node index. I don't think you *can* fix it as
> you seek. Bi-directionality isn't an enforceable property. The spec makes
> no guarantee. The internet makes no guarantee. You might as well remove the
> family property entirely than try to do what you suggest.
>
> What you propose isn't possible by the properties of tor's network. The
> best you can do is take a measurement and hope it applies to all views of
> the network. I made some comments alluding to this in 16276. I would
> happily work on the ticket if it actually presented a solution.
>
> Comments appreciated.
> --leeroy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/attachments/20150702/8eb06ed1/attachment.html>