[tor-dev] tor-dev Digest, Vol 79, Issue 4
John kongtcheu
johnkongtcheu at gmail.com
Sat Aug 12 19:02:35 UTC 2017
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-request at lists.torproject.org>
wrote:
> Send tor-dev mailing list submissions to
> tor-dev at 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-request at lists.torproject.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> tor-dev-owner at 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 <nickm at torproject.org>
> To: tor-dev at lists.torproject.org
> Subject: [tor-dev] Proposal 281: downloading microdescriptors in bulk
> Message-ID:
> <CAKDKvux=eJBh_JsEeiqnhbEbcgRVeMRrbm2G7itZ8kX
> y4+M26A at 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 at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of tor-dev Digest, Vol 79, Issue 4
> **************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/attachments/20170812/8c79e7f0/attachment.html>
More information about the tor-dev
mailing list