15:00:53 #startmeeting SponsorR 15:00:53 Meeting started Tue Jun 23 15:00:53 2015 UTC. The chair is asn_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:53 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 15:01:05 hello 15:01:10 who is here today? 15:01:17 but rather keep an ec2 instance busy for a few hours and give us results. 15:01:19 hello! 15:01:23 * syverson is here 15:01:45 no sign of ohmygodel yet 15:01:48 let's start i'd say 15:01:56 karsten: ec2 instance to crunch old data? 15:02:11 during past week, on SponsorR/HS matters 15:02:17 i worked with DonnchaC on his SoP project 15:02:18 dgoulet: that, or your cluster in the living room. ;) 15:02:27 karsten: data that hs health comes up with makes sense over a long period of time, I can't go beyond 5 HS without failing more heavily on fetch :S 15:02:28 i reviewed dgoulet's #4862 some more 15:02:41 and I also wrote a first analysis of the stats from #15513 and #15744 15:02:48 this can be found here: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/F8P18C7wYp-hs-stats 15:02:53 dgoulet: let's discuss more later! 15:03:13 hello 15:03:18 i also spend an hour or so trying to understand why we are seeing intro circuits on the wild with lifetime 25 hours + 15:03:27 when intro circuits should last maximum 24 hours 15:03:41 i still don't have the answer to this. although it would be nice to come up with an answer before publishing our results. 15:03:52 in any case, that's it from me this week. 15:03:53 next? 15:04:22 * dgoulet can go 15:04:25 please 15:05:31 first big thanks to asn_ on reviewing/testing #4862, it's still running strong on an HS I have, I worked on #16399 and #16389 for which the latter should help improve #16381 15:06:19 I wrote the analysis for #13209, found in pad above and finally I re-read 224 in order to prepare to meeting in July :) 15:06:21 * dgoulet done 15:06:30 thx 15:06:33 next? 15:06:38 * karsten can go next 15:06:41 karsten: go 15:06:58 so, I was planning to evaluate the #1944 data, but then saw that rob sent very similar results from onionperf. 15:07:23 but today I looked at rob's time-to-first-byte graph and saw how that differs from the torperf data 15:07:38 * robgjansen waves 15:07:43 and figured that a closer comparison of the two tools might be worthwhile. 15:07:46 * karsten waves back 15:08:03 aha 15:08:06 in what sense comparison? 15:08:37 in what exactly they measure, whether there are different setups (no cache clearing, etc.). 15:08:38 the results were pretty similar right? 15:08:39 aha 15:08:42 i think the difference has to do with when we start the timer 15:08:55 quite possible! 15:08:57 we can discuss more now, or in discussion? 15:09:03 in discussion, I'd say. 15:09:05 but yes, we should. 15:09:08 ok, great :) 15:09:08 sounds good 15:09:11 #topic onionperf torperf 15:09:13 nothing more from me. 15:09:14 thx 15:09:15 next? 15:09:36 * syverson can go 15:09:41 please 15:09:50 Wrote and gave talk to 18F/US Digital Services about Tor in general and also ways in which I thought they could support/encourage use of Tor, and in particular use onion services to better protect users of US Government service sites. 15:09:51 Met with Peter Eckersley, Seth Schoen, and Mike Perry to discuss one-ion services (aka Direct aka �) onion services that would play well with Let's Encrypt, require minimal changes for Tor, etc. I haven't written up our results yet, but will share them soon. (I'll write them on the plane from SF today if not before.) 15:09:51 Done. 15:10:16 interesting! 15:10:25 yeah cool 15:10:25 thanks 15:10:32 next? robgjansen 15:10:45 * karsten likes the one-ion idea. (without having many further ideas on that, but it's a funny idea.) 15:11:09 one-ion? 15:11:15 first time i hear of this term 15:11:20 Current services are two-nion 15:11:20 i also like it maybe 15:11:23 um, i'm not sure i have much for status for this meeting 15:11:34 https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/sponsors/SponsorR/Terminology?action=diff&version=26 15:11:35 robgjansen: ok no worries 15:11:36 Require one onions (client) or two (client and server). 15:11:38 i mostly want to sync on the upcoming HS meeting and with karsten on onioniperf 15:11:48 relatedly, i've been working on kist 15:12:01 and hoping to be able to show how it can imporve onion service latency 15:12:18 hold for ticket number... 15:12:37 seems like the guard would be a bottleneck that kist can't help too much with. looking forward to learning more. :) 15:12:52 #12541 15:13:27 thx robgjansen 15:13:28 maybe kist still helps because tor gets to make decisions about what goes out next, in a way that's much closer to the metal 15:13:41 perhaps the guard could be a problem, depending on the popularity of the service 15:13:48 i think so, i think kist helps end-to-end 15:14:01 load balancing at the guard->HS link is another problem 15:14:29 or, load balancing in general (it may not happen at the guard->HS link...) 15:15:06 ack 15:15:12 where by load balancing here i am thinking in the more traditional server load balancing sense, and not in the bandwidth measurement sense 15:15:15 armadev: you have anything to report? 15:15:36 i might, but nothing comes to mind. i've been doing too many things. i guess i report: my apartment is now cleaner than it was on thursday. 15:15:55 that's nice 15:15:56 ok thx 15:15:57 also i asked david to sit in on the google hangout this afternoon. i don't think i have the hardware/software for it. he doesn't either. 15:15:57 * ohmygodel can go next 15:16:01 go for it 15:16:04 ohmygodel: ! 15:16:08 ohmygodel: go 15:16:20 armadev: (still on my list of things to try to fix this afternoon... :S) 15:16:21 we're now running two exit relays 15:16:24 on a pretty fast host 15:16:34 i'm running PrivEx on one of them 15:16:39 ! 15:16:40 contributing to Tariq's deployment 15:16:53 neat. where are they deployed? 15:16:56 i'm starting a third today on a separate host 15:16:59 i hope to add all of the HS statistics we had talked about wanting to such a deployment 15:17:08 how is privex working for you? 15:17:19 fine no problem 15:17:48 ohmygodel: ack 15:17:53 it only collects the thing they talk about in the paper: a count of visits (aka DNS resolutions) to a fixed list of censored sites 15:17:59 providers: arvixe.com and pulseservers.com 15:18:03 i also met again with dov gordon 15:18:05 ohmygodel: check out our branch in #15744 for how to collect some of those statistics 15:18:14 asn_: cool thx 15:18:31 dov gordon is starting as an assistant CS prof at george mason in the fall 15:18:42 his expertise is secure computation 15:18:49 oh nice\ 15:19:01 he's interested in working on applying recent protocols to statistics collection in Tor 15:19:23 there are a bunch of recent papers on the threat model most appropriate to tor 15:19:35 namely, dishonest majority, malicious adversary 15:19:47 aha 15:20:08 so i'll be continuing to look into that in the coming months 15:20:14 very interesting 15:20:19 is dov gordon coming to pets? 15:20:28 i don't think so 15:20:37 his phd advisor (jonathan katz) is giving the PETS keynote though 15:20:44 on the topic of secure computation 15:21:04 ah very interesting 15:21:20 or, will he be in dc the week after? asn could meet him then too maybe. 15:21:25 read some katz papers during my msc thesis. lots of papers on group key exchanges. 15:21:26 also... 15:21:55 armadev: dov gordon lives in DC, and i bet a meeting could be arranged 15:22:09 ! 15:22:11 i'll leave it to other people what their priorities are 15:22:18 we have been hoping to get teor to help with some direct onion services development 15:22:25 in fact, dov and i are already meeting in DC at 5PM on July 13th, if that works for anybody else 15:22:55 ohmygodel: i have a flight at 6PM off DC that same day. 15:23:00 robgjansen: wow interesting! 15:23:02 we are trying to figure out how to arrange a contract with him 15:23:20 great. 15:23:25 i will be working on this, and on this project in the coming months 15:23:44 i wish we could have teor in PETS or in the HS meeting. or at least in the Tor meeting on september. 15:23:47 asn_: ok, perhaps the meeting could be moved 15:24:03 you rang? 15:24:04 i hope we can get him to the dev meeting in berlin 15:24:11 oh! :) 15:24:28 ohmygodel: well, i know nothing about secure compuation so my presense is not that important 15:24:35 ohmygodel: let's speak about secure compuattion during PETS though 15:24:35 (hastur hastur teor) 15:24:46 ohmygodel: maybe i will find something to inject myself into 15:25:09 ohmygodel: ack 15:25:10 ok 15:25:11 great 15:25:20 i guess this sums up our briefing phase? 15:25:22 let's move to discussion? 15:25:29 what topics would you like to see addressed? 15:25:31 teor: look forward to talking with you as planned 15:25:35 Impending Memex madness. 15:25:44 - we have the onionperf vs torperf thing 15:25:57 ok, cool 15:26:02 so as i said in previous emails 15:26:09 - we have the upcoming HS meeting that maybe we should think of agenda or something. 15:26:37 oh sorry did i jump the gun? 15:26:48 robgjansen: maybe or maybe not. 15:26:55 not sure if anyone wants to suggest other discussion topics. 15:27:02 if not, we can go ahead with yours. 15:27:11 asn_: ok tell me when to go 15:27:17 I would love to clarify this also: 11:27 < syverson> Impending Memex madness. 15:27:18 - i'd also like to discuss dgoulet's results from the HS health tool 15:27:31 It seems like Phil has had a bunch of Memex meetings, but more focused specifically on 15:27:31 the stuff most of the rest of the Memex program is doing rather than things that, e.g., we 15:27:31 usually talk about in Sponsor R IRC meetings. Likewise there are some planning documents 15:27:31 about the next quarter that basically don't seem to fit at all with most of what NRL or TPI 15:27:31 do for Sponsor R. I hope people attending this hangout this PM (I'll be headed towards 15:27:32 the airport at that time) can find out how/if we should be involved with this. Unless we get 15:27:34 much better clarification (not expected) I'm going to ask Wade for guidance. 15:28:17 oh 15:28:27 syverson: can you point me at the planning documents? 15:28:40 rob, aaron: i hear you'll be at the hangout? can you take notes and report-back? 15:28:42 that damn google hangout... 15:29:00 armadev: i'll be at the hangout 15:29:01 Basically, they don't exist yet. There's a template available on the memex wiki that I got. 15:29:08 I'll mail them to you. 15:29:23 i plan to let aaron take notes and avoid the meeting in favor of productivity 15:29:26 armadev: i will be taking notes, and i'll send them to memex@csl.sri.com 15:29:38 great. 15:29:43 ohmygodel: very useful. thanks. 15:29:53 It is all about domain specific crawling indexing etc. with the domains mentioned in the recent email exchange w/ Phil. 15:30:23 We're on the hidden persona domain. Nobody seems to know what that means. 15:30:28 yeah. ideal for us is to keep doing useful things for the world while also having them think we're useful. 15:31:04 I'm hoping Wade recognizes why Chris included us and still thinks it's a good idea. 15:31:31 i guess i hope this too. 15:32:35 ok 15:32:37 But we are kind of a side thing, and when I see planning for the summercamp (their latest term) I worry that we 15:32:52 're a side that they're happy to set aside. 15:34:07 Planning that is all about big integrated tools in support of domain specific searches for target consumers. 15:34:45 Well SRI is a big help here 15:34:53 they are doing crawling 15:35:04 and have developed some tools for specific domains 15:35:27 and have worked with hyperion grey on some pseudonym (aka "hidden persona") tracking 15:35:43 Yes. That helps the overall LIGHTS contribution for sure. But I think that has been progressing as a straight SRI effort, not as a LIGHTS effort. 15:35:47 yes. hoping that sri keeps them happy so we can keep writing tor is an..exciting gambit. 15:36:08 a smart one if it works. a foolish one if it doesn't. :) 15:36:17 lately, seems they need Tor for their PR also :P 15:36:54 Is that what "hidden persona" is? That is much clearer than any of the long recent exchange I had w/ Phil. 15:37:13 I never heard any reference to pseudonymous tracking. 15:37:33 syverson: yes, i believe that term was used in that sense in earlier memex meetings 15:38:37 ohmygodel: Yes I now recall that, but it would have been nice if the domain leader who has been working with Hyperion Gray had responded with that. 15:38:59 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 15:39:07 i am, alas, expecting to get a sense of what the phrase means right about the time that the presentations about it have ended 15:39:46 I wasn't planning to gambit per se. I was hoping to be explicit with Wade about what we are doing, how it has helped (e.g. in some of the public media about Memex) etc. 15:40:44 We have done things *with* SRI and helped improve crawling. I don't want to downplay that to him, but I want to play up the other contributions. 15:40:50 * robgjansen goes afk momentarily 15:41:07 plausible. maybe at pets we should chat a bit about how to position that. a fine hike topic. 15:41:23 A good walk spoiled. 15:41:32 ;>) 15:41:34 :) 15:41:41 so i guess we will learn more soon when the upcoming hangout happens 15:41:54 syverson: should we talk more about this topic or move to next? 15:41:58 You dream big. 15:42:01 i encourage anybody with working hardware, software, and internet at the time to attend and tell us about it :) 15:42:19 Next is fine I think. I just wanted to make sure all were aware. 15:42:50 ok 15:43:01 let's talk about onionperf and torperf next? karsten / robgjansen ? 15:43:13 is robgjansen back? 15:43:14 * robgjansen is back 15:43:19 ah cool 15:43:20 hi, yes 15:43:34 so, onionperf 15:43:53 the main reason i did it was to have a baseline for onion service performance 15:44:26 but karsten did something similar in torperf and it makes much more sense for him to keep running that since it is integrated with metrics@ 15:44:38 it's not yet, I just have a plan for that. 15:44:39 (or can be made to be) 15:44:44 right :) 15:45:07 but you mentioned that we might be able to re-use parts of onionperf. 15:45:09 the main advantage of onionperf is that it uses my shadow traffic generator 15:45:20 yes, that one. 15:45:23 a.k.a. tgen 15:45:26 yes 15:45:27 how does it work? 15:45:35 oh 15:45:44 you write a python script to define a behavior 15:45:55 the python script spits out an xml file 15:45:59 in graphml format 15:46:10 you feed that as a parameter to tgen 15:46:34 and tgen will create connections and transfer random data following that xml model 15:46:52 the idea is you can model any behvaior with this 15:47:04 how does the server side learn what the behavior is? 15:47:05 and tgen is your tool or written by someone else? 15:47:10 right now i am modeling torperf-style 50k, 1m, 5m single downloads 15:47:25 i wrote tgen 15:47:29 i use it in shadow 15:47:30 ok 15:47:36 also python? 15:47:37 i maintain it in shadow and will continue to 15:47:48 how do you define behavior for downloading a 5mb file? 15:47:56 i made it so you can compile it outside of shadow and run it normally 15:48:01 or do you define behavior on how much time to wait between downloading these files many times 15:48:04 ? 15:48:09 the client and server both run tgen 15:48:30 so they both understand "tgen" protocol 15:49:18 oh i se 15:49:19 e 15:49:24 an example of the python script used to create the behaviors is here 15:49:26 https://github.com/shadow/shadow/wiki/3-Simulation-Customization#customizing-generator-behaviors 15:49:54 tgen has several "actions" 15:50:17 the main ones are 'start' 'pause' 'transfer' 'end' 15:50:28 this is how you add a 5m file download 15:50:31 G.add_node("transfer", type="get", protocol="tcp", size="5 MiB") 15:50:32 how do we know that these profiles are realistic? 15:50:37 remember this is just to bulid the xml file 15:51:05 yes, so we will need to generate plausible models 15:51:06 is it one client and one server that matches up to the client? or can it be one server that does the same tgen behavior in parallel to n clients? 15:51:17 nickm: ^^^ ideas for chutney 2 15:51:18 the latter 15:51:27 great 15:51:44 that same github page has more documentation 15:51:45 how crazy would it be to have the server run on port 80 and answer to the world? 15:51:51 teor: yes indeed, something like tgen should be reusable in the chutney context 15:52:08 not that crazy 15:52:11 (just thinking if we could use it for torperf's default model of measuring non-HS performance) 15:52:24 i think we should most definitely use it for torperf! 15:52:29 (shouldn't it need authentication) 15:52:35 (if it was world reachable) 15:52:36 armadev: I created a similar scheme in my draft patch to load-test using chutney. But it's a hack. 15:52:59 true, it currently has no auth 15:53:18 that because it now just runs either in shadow 15:53:30 or on localhost in onionperf 15:53:39 robgjansen: so torperf as it is measures "time to download a 5kb file over hidden services" 15:53:43 what would torperf + tgen measure? 15:53:58 (i.e., the onionperf client goes out to tor and comes back to the onionperf server running on the same machine) 15:53:59 "time required for a client of type X to complete its jobs"? 15:54:22 sure 15:54:33 you can also add dependencies between transfers 15:54:41 so say transfer1 goes first 15:54:56 and then transfer[2-20] start after transfer one 15:55:15 those could all be considered a "web page" 15:55:31 right, get the top level html page, then get the embedded objects 15:55:38 i see 15:55:47 yes, that sounds more realistic than a plain 5kb file. 15:55:50 so we could use real data from htmlarchive to generate plausible models 15:55:53 we have wanted more realistic measurements in torperf for a while. 15:56:06 sorry, httparchive 15:56:08 http://httparchive.org/ 15:56:41 another cool thing is that reserchers or devs could just generate the xml 15:56:45 using python 15:56:52 and not ever need to worry about the code 15:57:11 so you could get help generating realistic models 15:57:32 ack 15:57:46 btw, i think i have a Summer of Privacy meeting in 2 mins... 15:57:53 so maybe we should start wrapping up? 15:57:53 I'm here 15:57:53 so, if this sounds useful for torperf to move to this 15:58:08 robgjansen: it does sound useful. but of course karsten knows best on how to do this. 15:58:10 it does sound useful. 15:58:11 hi 15:58:15 i am willing to visit karsten and help work on whatever needs to be done to integrate into torperf 15:58:19 kernelcorn: give us a few mins please :) 15:58:27 including adding auth if needed 15:58:49 well, having the option to add auth would be great. 15:59:04 I agree that it's not that important right now, with HS measurements being the first target. 15:59:04 we can discuss missing features later 15:59:09 ok 15:59:12 maybe a trac ticket is in order? 15:59:20 one of the challenges with longitudinal tests is that you really want to do a given test forever. so in the ideal world we would pick the best test first. in the real world we might find ourselves always adding to the set of tests we do, and never closing old ones down, because they still might be useful. so be it. 15:59:45 yep, have to start somewhere :) 15:59:59 so now, we both have datasets 16:00:00 robgjansen: okay, let me read up the onionperf/tgen documentation. 16:00:03 (for example, even though we might be able to make a much more realistic test, we probably will want to keep doing the 50/1m/5m ones) 16:00:13 agreed 16:00:43 robgjansen: and by that I mean: let me *try 16:00:44 should we plan what to do with out datasets short term for the memex meeting 16:01:07 to read up the onionperf/tget documentation as time permits, as the month end is getting closer and stuff is piling up here. 16:01:16 we can use both graphs for the slides or whatever? and say we tried with two methodologies? 16:01:17 karsten: ack, should we plan my visit off-irc? 16:01:26 robgjansen: sure. 16:01:37 robgjansen: so, why are our graphs different? 16:01:44 (if we still have time) 16:01:55 (if not, -> email) 16:02:02 let me suggest email on this one? :) 16:02:07 or trac ticket? 16:02:08 ok :) 16:02:21 this is a short term item for memex meeting ? 16:02:34 how to combine or show our datasets? 16:02:34 figuring why the graphs are different? 16:02:35 maybe not. 16:02:45 i think even one set of graphs is sufficient for the upcoming meeting? 16:02:50 i assume we want to show this data during our 1 hour presentation 16:02:51 or maybe both sets of graphs is OK? 16:03:08 right, we need to decide this 16:03:11 "we made this graph with this methodology." "and we also have this new technique of simulating traffic, that produced this other graph" 16:03:30 i have over a month worth of data at this point 16:03:39 i started it during the last april meeting 16:03:51 or shortly after fixing some things 16:03:54 same here, I think. not sure exactly how many weeks, but a few. 16:04:11 robgjansen: ..we have a 1 hour presentation? when? 16:04:21 Next week, most of us will be in a PETS talk on anonymous communication at this time Tuesday. Can we just agree that we'll figure out a time for the next Sponsor R meeting (which will be crucial given the PI meeting starts the following week) some time there when we're all (most) face-to-face? 16:04:35 armadev: ? 16:04:36 syverson: sounds reasoanble. 16:04:38 that works for me 16:04:47 am i mistaken about the hour? 16:05:04 You mean at the PI meeting? I don't think so. 16:05:14 yes i mean at the PI meeting 16:05:15 I don't think we have a presentation at all at this point. 16:05:25 afaik, SRI+Tor+NRL has 1 hour together 16:05:36 oh 16:05:42 No. Hidden personas have an hour. 16:05:42 ok, well i have to defer to paul 16:05:56 i alas haven't heard of such a thing either. 16:06:10 it would be useful to have it, but i guess we'd find the other 14 hours of presentations boring, so. 16:06:11 I say this all with a confidence in my lack of understanding WTF is supposed to happen there. 16:06:42 it might be that we have a surprise 45 minutes for pitching everything to wade. might be nice to have some graphs for that. 16:07:01 yeah, there will be graphs. 16:07:10 I'm thinking at this point our time will be best in one-on-ones w/ Wade and working amongst ourselves. But that's just a guess. 16:07:40 such a great feeling to know what is expected of us. wish i had it here. 16:07:49 Being ready for an elevator speech with slides is a good idea. 16:07:52 ... 16:08:03 Yawning: give me a few minutes plz 16:08:13 ok 16:08:24 so that's that on this. 16:08:27 one last thing i wanted to ask 16:08:39 do you think it would be worthwhile discussing agenda for the upcoming HS meeting in DC? 16:08:44 like voting on topics we want to see discussed etc? 16:08:51 or should we just do this process the first 2 hours of the meeting? 16:08:58 OK let's figure out when to meet at PETS and have it also on IRC for those not in attendence (to be announced when). 16:09:07 asn_: can't hurt to vote, to get people thinking early? 16:09:14 armadev: ack 16:09:28 asn_: also, did people sort out a plan for whether to have the meeting physically nearby memex, or not? there are tradeoffs each way. 16:09:30 syverson: should we figure out meeting time beforehand? or just do it ad-hoc during PETS? 16:09:40 armadev: i saw you saying that 16:09:50 armadev: i'm fine with having the meeting nearby memex. 16:10:06 maybe the people who go there the first days, can see what options there are for this? 16:10:12 asn: I was thinking we need to wrap up now. So don't have time to figure that out. 16:10:16 * karsten won't be at PETS and would be fine reading a summary of that meeting after it has happened. 16:10:20 karsten: ack 16:10:21 syverson: ok 16:10:35 asn: yes. we might even talk to phil about getting one of the little office rooms reserved for us for those days. 16:10:37 syverson: we will be like 4-5 people, so I think figuring out a common time might not be super hard. 16:10:52 ok 16:10:57 asn_: there should be more than 4-5 16:10:58 all these things make sense for now. 16:11:05 more like 7-10 16:11:10 during PETS? 16:11:13 I think the copresent can sync. And we'll just announce for the others. 16:11:18 * teor is still trying to get head around PETS 16:11:20 me, you, armadev, syverson, robjohnson, nick mathewson? 16:11:22 i meant at the HS meeting 16:11:27 ohmygodel: ah yes for sure. 16:11:40 ohmygodel: i meant figuring out a common time for the SponsorR meeting during PETS. 16:11:44 teor: what do you mean? 16:12:19 wait, do you mean robjohnson? 16:12:27 hno i meant robgjansen 16:12:34 asn_: just catching up with all the meetings 16:12:34 i just dont know how to spell 16:12:37 oh, cause he could be there too... :) 16:12:42 robgjansen: :P 16:12:51 I'm guessing we'll do Monday or Tuesday evening some time. 16:12:52 asn_: in my head 16:12:56 ack 16:12:57 #endmeeting