[tor-relays] Measuring the Accuracy of Tor Relays' Advertised Bandwidths
Rob Jansen
rob.g.jansen at nrl.navy.mil
Thu Aug 1 22:18:19 UTC 2019
> On Jul 31, 2019, at 7:34 PM, teor <teor at riseup.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
Hey there!
> Can you define "goodput"?
Application-level throughput, i.e., bytes transferred in packet payloads but not counting packet headers or retransmissions. In our case I mean the number of bytes that Tor reports in the BW controller event.
> How is it different to the bandwidth reported by a standard speed test?
I believe that iperf also reports goodput as defined above.
> How is it different to the bandwidth measured by sbws?
I am not an expert on sbws, but I believe it also measures goodput.
> Where is your server?
West coast US.
> How do you expect the location of your server to affect your results?
I expect that the packet loss that occurs between my measurement machine and the target may limit the goodput I am able to achieve, and packet loss tends to occur more frequently on links with higher latency. I plan to use multiple sockets (as standard speed testing tools like iperf do) and multiple circuits to try to mitigate the effects.
Note that this is meant to be a fairly simple experiment, not a complete measurement system. Of course I won't be able to measure more than the bandwidth capacity of my measurement machine, but many relays already carry significant load so I'll just be giving them a boost.
Peace, love, and positivity,
Rob
More information about the tor-relays
mailing list