[tor-relays] Open call for proposals for improving the health of the Tor relay operator community and the Tor network

[gus]

On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 07:49:47PM +0100, nusenu wrote:
> gus:
> > On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 11:26:07PM +0100, nusenu wrote:
> > > I've got some practical experience with how things are (not) handled
> > > by the Tor Project in this space which discourages involvement.
> > > The past has also shown that proposals in this area are not
> > > handled as tor proposals in the sense of [1].
> > 
> > I believe some proposals about relay operators were not handled as
> > people had different opinions about the Tor Community governance and its
> > process.
> 
> I actually had something else in mind (see geko's reply) but
> if you say that people had no clear understanding or different opinions about
> community governance than it might also be a good time to start clarifying it.
> 
> The point "clarify and describe the different involved roles" as mentioned on Saturday's relay meetup
> is a good start in this specific context and I agree that it will be useful.
> 
> > > > We're not in the process of approving any of them.
> > > 
> > > a few questions:
> > > 
> > > - Can you describe the process these proposals will undergo after they got collected?
> > > - Who "approves" / rejects them?
> > > - Will it be a public and transparent process?
> > > - Who will be involved in the process?
> > > - How are relay operators included and to what extend?
> > > 
> > > - Will "approved" proposals be enforced?
> > > - How will they get enforced? New tor release or directory authority vote?
> > > - Will directory authorities be formally required to enforce "approved" proposals?
> > 
> > Great questions.
> > 
> > - Yes, it will be a public and transparent process;
> 
> When geko highlighted the sponsor in the meeting something along the lines of
> "sitting down with our sponsor and defining criterias" (if you haven't been at the meeting don't take this too serious)
> it made me wonder: If this is a public and transparent process, who is financing this work? (dubbed S112)
>

If you're not familiar with project management practices at the Tor
Project, it's important to note that Sponsor+code is simply a numerical
code assigned by the operations/grants team to a particular funded
project. It is not a cypherpunk "scramble box" as some may mistakenly
assume.

The sponsor name, DRL (Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human
Rights, and Labor - US Gov), can be found in the linked milestone that was
previously shared, during the meetup, and is also publicly listed in our
GitLab instance.

Milestone:
https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/-/milestones/44#tab-issues

S112 activity tracked with the label "S112" in our GitLab:
https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/-/issues/?sort=created_date&state=opened&label_name%5B%5D=Sponsor%20112&first_page_size=100

You can find all the current Tor Project sponsors, projects and
reports here:
 - Project wiki page: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/team/-/wikis/sponsors-2023
 - Current Sponsors: https://www.torproject.org/about/sponsors/
 - Fiscal year reports: https://www.torproject.org/about/reports/

For those interested on learning more about S112 work, the Network
Health team meet every Monday at 16 UTC, on #tor-meeting (irc.oftc.net),
and we've been adding the relevant topics on the relay operator meetup
agenda.

> > Our goal is to build this governance process.
> 
> Do you have a timeline for building and defining the governance process
> which probably should be the first thing to do
> so people can make up their minds on whether they like
> the process and want to be involved or not?
> 

Sure, here is the timeline: October 2022 - January 2024

 - We called for proposals from the community (March 3 2023)
 - Work on proposals (TPO) (like meta proposal about the process and
   governance and different stake holders) (March/April)
 - Proposal evaluation (May/July)
 - Events and offline discussions with community (August/September)
 - Approving proposals after feedback from the community and figuring out
   the details of enforcement/adhering to them (September-December)
 - Proposals go live (January 2024)

> > > > adopted by a meaningful fraction of the Tor community (e.g.
> > > > providing valid contact information).
> > > 
> > > Can you elaborate on how you define "valid" in this context?
> > 
> > From the Expectations for relay operators:
> > 
> > "Be sure to set your ContactInfo to a working email address in case we
> > need to reach you."
> 
> Since that document says nothing about verifying that string
> "hopefully valid" is in my opinion a more accurate description for it
> than "valid", no?
> 
> kind regards,
> nusenu

hm, for the scope of that document (Expectation for relay operators), I
don't think we need to describe a verification process of "working
email". For other proposals, it could be important to define the
process, though.

But you can suggest a better phrase here:
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/community/relays/-/issues/18

Gus
-- 
The Tor Project
Community Team Lead
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20230327/33520c47/attachment.sig>