17:00:48 <nickm> #startmeeting
17:00:48 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Dec  5 17:00:48 2016 UTC.  The chair is nickm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:48 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:56 <nickm> hello network team people!
17:01:34 <nickm> it's good to see folks around
17:01:36 <nickm> status time!
17:01:47 <dgoulet> hi
17:01:52 <asn> hello
17:01:57 * nickm spent last week finishing the prop#271 code.  Then releasing more tors.
17:02:21 <nickm> In my upcoming week, I'll try to do more review & merging; try to fix all the issues that will show up in my code during review...
17:02:37 <nickm> ...try to advance mikeperry's netflow branch towards a merge...
17:02:51 <nickm> ...try to release 0.2.8.11 if appropriate (and I think it is)
17:03:05 <nickm> ...and try to figure out what I'm working on next.
17:03:09 <nickm> I'm keen to fuzz some.
17:03:13 <nickm> that's all for me!
17:04:43 <asn> can go next
17:04:46 <asn> here we go:
17:04:47 <asn> Hello this has been a busy week that involves lots of travelling. During the week I met with Aaron Johnson,
17:04:50 <asn> David, Roger and Chelsea and worked on various things Tor. During this week, I
17:04:53 <asn> also merged the client auth torspec branch that was hanging around, and also
17:04:55 <asn> updated the proposal-status.txt metatext in torspec:
17:04:58 <asn> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-December/011709.html
17:05:00 <asn> I also sent an email about restarting the proposal reading groups that was well
17:05:03 <asn> received, but I have had no time to schedule anything:
17:05:05 <asn> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-November/011703.html
17:05:08 <asn> I also wrote the Ahmia blog post for the fundraising campaign.
17:05:10 <asn> I have tons of *big* things to do like revise the ESTABLISH_INTRO branch,
17:05:13 <asn> revise HSDir branch, and review the guard stuff. I'm currently prioritizing the
17:05:15 <asn> latter, and I'm not really sure when I'll get to the rest. A bit stressed. I'm
17:05:18 <asn> also going for vacations on Thursday and will be back Monday. I will be
17:05:20 <asn> internet connected during vacations but not super active. That's that.
17:05:23 <asn> [3$
17:05:45 <asn> The review is going OK so far, but there are _tons_ of stuff and behaviors to test. I'm not sure how much I will manage to do before mid-December, if I also want to fit the prop224 for the 0.3.0 deadline.
17:05:55 <asn> that's that!
17:06:09 <armadev> hello world. last week i spent keeping some funders happy. also the month of december, as asn says, is going to be exciting with the blog post treadmill.
17:06:33 <armadev> i actually wrote half of a proposal on the train though -- "authenticating sendme cells to mitigate bandwidth attacks"
17:06:41 <armadev> maybe i'll write the other half on my airplane tomorrow
17:06:42 <armadev> .
17:06:57 <dgoulet> armadev: neat!
17:07:01 * dgoulet can go
17:07:14 <dgoulet> Last week for me was mostly Sponsor R quaterly meeting. Spent one full day with asn on working out prop224 open questions and issues. I will be following up with those on tor-dev@ this afternoon.
17:07:17 <dgoulet> I just finished #15056 review. I'll be working this week on #20657 and finishing unit tests (finally) on #20029. Will also take some time on review group 13.
17:07:26 <dgoulet> --
17:07:50 * isabela can go
17:07:58 <nickm> when you say "the review is going okay so far" do you mean prop#271 ?
17:08:02 <asn> yes nickm
17:08:24 <isabela> hi there, i got some load of work last week that had to be prioritize since it was time sensitive stuff (fundraising and drl propposal)
17:08:32 <isabela> but i did worked on organizing our wiki page - i did it offline and will be updating the week today with it - will email the list and we can revert it if ppl hate or improve it if ppl kinda like but it could be done better :)
17:08:43 <isabela> I'm closing the loop on sponsor u report too
17:08:49 <isabela> and I am leaving thursday for short vacation and will be back on tuesday / will miss next monday meeting
17:08:52 <isabela> done
17:11:02 <nickm> dgoulet: sounds like I'm revising #15056 soon. Am I in for a lot of work there?
17:11:26 <dgoulet> nickm: nope
17:11:44 <dgoulet> nickm: no show stopper so it shouldn't be much work to revision
17:12:18 <nickm> asn: any way I can help with the prop#271 thing? I can put in a bunch more testing and r&d time, I think.
17:12:59 <mikeperry> I am here. I saw your mail nickm. I need to page all that stuff back in again. maybe later this week. happy to discuss things whenever, though
17:13:13 <mikeperry> (re netflow padding)
17:13:26 <nickm> mikeperry: cool!  What I most want there is for Roger to tell me "I read it and understood it and mike explained it to me. Seems ok."
17:13:33 <nickm> I'm working through the other stuff as well.
17:13:40 <nickm> sorry for taking so long with this one
17:14:37 <asn> nickm: hmm, more testing would definitely help. With Chelsea, we  made a list of scenarios that should be tested, and there is not enough time to do all of them this week.
17:15:00 <asn> nickm: you can also help by answering a few questions on IRC. I have 2-3 of them.
17:15:01 <nickm> a list would help!
17:15:10 <nickm> asn: glad to!
17:15:42 <asn> nickm: ok perhaps after the meeting!
17:15:43 <chelseakomlo> asn: nickm: maybe we can put that QA list somewhere and track who has tested what/with which results?
17:15:54 <asn> chelseakomlo: that could be smart yes.
17:15:57 <asn> let me make a pad
17:15:57 <nickm> chelseakomlo: sounds good!  Maybe a wiki page, linked from the ticket?
17:16:12 <asn> hm a wiki page
17:16:13 <asn> ok
17:18:46 <nickm> mikeperry: I don't know if you have time, but if you _do_ have time to look at #15056, you'd have some good feedback there too
17:18:49 <nickm> any more updates?
17:19:01 <chelseakomlo> short update
17:19:39 <nickm> go for it!
17:20:13 <chelseakomlo> i will help with guard QA, and continue reviewing code as well
17:20:42 <chelseakomlo> nickm: i sent round 2 of object diagrams, and have some more arch diagrams from conversations with dgoulet and asn that i will create
17:20:47 <chelseakomlo> that's all for me :)
17:20:53 <nickm> cool. I'll try to look at those rsn!
17:21:07 <asn> i put notes of testing scenarios here: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/NewGuardAlgorithmTesting
17:21:20 <asn> I'm still going through the code so I have not had time to actually do testing.
17:21:35 <nickm> ok.
17:21:56 <nickm> one other thing that would help is to be more explicit about how stuff is tested
17:22:24 <asn> you mean isntead of "Test guard lifetime" I should specify the entire testing procedure?
17:22:37 <asn> yes indeed that would be helpful. i have not had time to think about that either.
17:22:47 <chelseakomlo> yep agreed
17:23:04 <nickm> not necessarily the whole procedure, but like ... "Start with clock a year ago. Stop. Restart with new clock. Verify that new guards get used"
17:23:09 <nickm> (actually that wouldn't work)
17:23:20 <asn> dgoulet: btw, I will be busy with the guard branch for the next days. unclear when I'll get to the ESTABLISH_INTRO branch. probs late next week.
17:23:23 <nickm> (but just the basic idea of "how do we do that")
17:23:49 <nickm> any more updates, or are we in discussion?
17:24:23 <nickm> let's say we're in discussion!
17:24:45 <mikeperry> nickm: ok, I will try to give #15056 a look. I have a long list of tiny nagging things to ge through first, though
17:24:48 <nickm> asn: feel free to break from guards if you need to go back to the ESTABLISH_INTRO branch.
17:24:51 <nickm> mikeperry: sure, no worries.
17:25:25 <asn> nickm: both of those tasks are big and lined up for 0.3.0 so I'm not sure how to prioritize.
17:25:27 <nickm> Here's a question for folks: would it help if I resusrrected my "tor-next" branch -- that is, a tor branch that has all of the big pending stuff merged on it already, for testing?
17:25:33 <asn> i will go with guards for now.
17:26:03 <nickm> like, would folks run that as their tor / on the test network / etc?
17:26:24 <nickm> (if not, there's not a huge amount of point.)
17:26:29 <dgoulet> asn: you want me to take it over addressing nickm review? I don't mind else it's fine by next week
17:26:50 <asn> dgoulet: do you have any other tasks lined up for 0.3.0?
17:27:10 <dgoulet> asn: many :) but I want that branch to be merged as #20029 would benefit from it as I'm based on it
17:27:37 <asn> right
17:28:08 <asn> your 0.3.0 prop224 task is #20029, right? or there is more?
17:28:35 <dgoulet> that one then emails then service side #20657
17:28:49 <dgoulet> and some tickets around prop224 that are pending
17:28:52 <asn> service side is not 0.3.0, right?
17:29:03 <dgoulet> ah right no for 030 it's relay cells
17:29:06 <asn> ack
17:29:14 <dgoulet> and some tickets with little code to make on them
17:29:18 <nickm> BTW, I don't know for sure what I'm on for the rest of the month. If you'd like some SponsorR hacking from me, I can try to help there too maybe
17:29:24 <nickm> unless something comes up, which it might. :)
17:29:32 <asn> in this case, if you finish #20029, and I'm still stuck in guard land, then maybe you can take ESTABLISH_INTRO as well.
17:29:46 <asn> but let's be in contact about that.
17:29:46 <dgoulet> asn: ok I'll let you know if I mutex_lock()
17:29:50 <asn> ack
17:30:09 <dgoulet> nickm: so far, review/merge is what we'll need for 030 :)
17:30:44 <nickm> okay; I'll try to be fast
17:31:04 <dgoulet> nickm: btw, I'm running #15056 on my public relay
17:31:07 <nickm> any other discussion topics? Anyone want to talk about fuzzing, or should I wait for teor to be around?
17:31:12 <nickm> dgoulet: neat
17:31:47 <asn> i have two questions wrt guard branch. not sure if it fits to discussion or post-meeting.
17:32:07 <nickm> asn: let's do immediately post-meeting if we wrap up soon?:
17:32:11 <asn> ack
17:32:24 <dgoulet> I'm good for this meeting
17:32:26 <nickm> dgoulet: the stuff for testing I had in mind was #15056 + #19877 + #16861 .
17:32:30 <nickm> going once!
17:32:38 <nickm> going twice!
17:32:45 <dgoulet> nickm: once merged, we can definitely at least deploy that in the test network
17:32:52 <nickm> if there are no more discussion topics....
17:33:07 <nickm> ...then it will have been a short meeting....
17:33:10 <nickm> ...which is nice!
17:33:31 <nickm> #endmeeting