16:00:48 #startmeeting metrics team 16:00:48 Meeting started Thu Jan 17 16:00:48 2019 UTC. The chair is karsten. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:48 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:51 let's start! 16:00:57 anything else for the agenda? 16:01:13 not from me 16:01:54 gaba: ? 16:01:55 no 16:01:58 ok 16:02:02 * Onionoo having some slow days (irl?) 16:02:12 i just wondered if we had an explanation for this 16:02:24 it fixed itself but it still is worrying that it was falling behind 16:02:40 I noticed other issues. 16:02:53 [java] Exception in thread "main" org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: FATAL: terminating connection due to administrator command 16:03:00 that's from metrics-web. 16:03:19 the next run after this one succeeded, but I'm still unsure if we lost any data. 16:03:30 there have been lots of infrastructure issues recently i think, maybe this is just related to that 16:03:40 yes, I think so. 16:03:46 the question is just whether it broke something. 16:04:16 I don't know yet. it's on my list for tomorrow to check. 16:04:22 ok cool 16:04:29 tomorrow, because it usually takes some time for issues to show. 16:04:37 i will be away from keys for 2 weeks starting tomorrow, so i can't do any deployments 16:04:44 but i can help with any reviews that are needed for hotfixes 16:05:04 okay! 16:05:23 * Funding opportunities (karsten) 16:05:37 We had our weekly meeting yesterday and this one was a big topic. 16:05:38 gaba: this is still a thing, right? 16:05:45 So far we are moving with several proposals. 16:06:10 If you have anything then this week would be when to talk about it. 16:06:24 but so far Al is working on some proposals ooni and browser related 16:06:43 should we do our own proposal, or add something to one of those proposals? 16:06:52 So far I think it would be good to include metrics in proposals for other teams too. Al may reach out to any of you about it. 16:07:32 that sounds good to me. 16:07:32 If you have anything that you think is something that can be a proposal on itself for metrics then that would be good. I can help as a liason for the fundraising team to bring other opportunities here to think about. 16:08:06 I think adding something to an existing proposal is easier, given the short period of time left. 16:08:11 yes 16:08:16 +1 16:08:28 can you ask al to reach out to us? 16:08:33 yes 16:08:44 okay, cool! 16:08:56 related to this, I had another idea on how to handle ideas lists. 16:09:25 for me it's pretty hard to write down ideas, because it feels like committing to something in the future without knowing how that future is going to look like. 16:10:08 I could imagine writing ideas if there's another step involved: whenever something might get funded, we then get the chance to flesh out the idea more, possibly write a proof of concept, and possibly say no, if it turns out to be a bad idea. 16:10:37 that wouldn't work with two weeks of notice, though. 16:10:52 yes, the issue is that we do not get things approved unless we write it 16:10:59 and that is the hard part 16:11:03 for grant-based projects 16:11:28 I was thinking that the proof of concept would have to happen outside of a grant. 16:11:32 And we are always sending a proof of concept as the first proposal and then being more specific later. 16:11:52 what you mean? 16:12:00 ah, I wasn't aware that there are grants for proofs of concept. 16:12:15 I was thinking of a week or two to try out if something's a good idea or not. 16:12:34 the grants we had in the past always expected things to work out in the end. 16:12:47 different opportunities work different. We always send the proposal and we do not know if it will be funded or not. And that is the issue when we do not get funded for something we need to have plan b. 16:12:52 for science-oriented contracts it is ok to present your findings as "this was a terrible idea" 16:13:10 irl: yes, it would be good to have such a model. 16:13:18 yes. We can include that in proposals. 16:13:32 these are generally where our proposal presents a research question as opposed to a methodology 16:13:57 i think this is something we can add to the hack week agenda 16:13:58 however, I'm also thinking about avoiding to ask stupid research questions. 16:14:04 there are too many options out there 16:14:18 yes, I wanted to suggest this, too. talk about this in brussels. 16:14:41 we need to find a way to work with the grants team to include metrics proposals or ideas on projects. and +1 for a discussion during hackweek 16:15:15 ok. 16:15:43 cool. moving on? 16:15:58 the issue with metrics is that it touches everything :) 16:15:59 yes 16:16:05 heh 16:16:10 * Clarification on sponsor 19 and discussion on how metrics can be involved (gaba) 16:16:24 what should we do and when? 16:16:33 yes, I wanted to clarify about this sponsor as it is not a 'traditional' one with clear deliverables 16:16:59 In the roadmap that roger is propposing for anti-censorsship there are a few places where metrics can be involved 16:17:14 s19 is until may but this roadmap is work to continue after s19 16:17:35 so it is something to think about when creating the new roadmap for metrics 16:18:19 what part of the work that needs to be done by metrics can be funded by s19 and whatfrom that roadmap is something that the team thinks is a priority 16:18:42 comments,questions? 16:19:07 we talked about bridgedb stats in mexico. 16:19:25 who's working on this on the bridgedb side? 16:19:49 right now nobody. I think it will be included in the network team roadmap while in brussels but is not there yet 16:20:15 okay. this is not something we can drive on our own. we can help drive it, but this needs a bridgedb dev. 16:20:37 but if you say we should consider this for our post-march roadmap, that sounds doable. 16:20:37 and is something that the anti-censorship team will be responsible for 16:20:45 ok 16:20:47 it sounds good 16:21:19 if I cc metrics-team on the ticket, will that work? 16:21:25 yes 16:22:25 okay. added some notes. 16:22:45 please remind us if we forget to add this to our next roadmap. 16:22:51 despite notes. 16:23:17 alright. shall we move on? 16:23:26 yes 16:23:31 * Moving forward with #28615 (with or without @type for network status entries) (karsten) 16:23:54 this seemed like something we might quickly move forward here. 16:24:05 yes 16:24:18 I was thinking that we could add a new @type for detached-signature, but not for the others. 16:24:30 we could add other types later. 16:24:31 from a dev perspective, i would like to have the network-status-entry types 16:24:52 and strings are cheap 16:24:52 ah, hmm. 16:25:19 I wonder, would it work to feed in a partial descriptor plus the descriptor type? 16:25:32 rather than a partial descriptor plus a partial descriptor identifier? 16:25:50 maybe with a flag this-is-a-partial-descriptor-string. 16:26:04 partial descriptor doesn't have the same meaning as it being a single status 16:26:16 plus a partial descriptor could also be the headers 16:26:25 i think network-status-entry keeps it nice and clear 16:26:50 it feels like we're starting to clutter things. 16:27:05 okay, let's maybe continue on the ticket then. 16:27:08 ok 16:27:22 i think we just have a lot of document types to think about 16:27:45 well, yes. 16:27:58 therefore I'm careful not to add identifiers for non-document types. 16:28:05 that is, partial document types. 16:28:20 but okay, maybe there are more aspects to consider here. 16:28:22 -> ticket 16:28:30 * Single psql database with multiple schemas for metrics-web (karsten) 16:28:39 (unless there's more on the last topic?) 16:28:46 we can do it on the ticket 16:28:48 ok. 16:29:02 this is another thing that might be quick to discuss here. 16:29:13 I was thinking that we could have a single psql database for metrics-web. 16:29:25 it feels like it could be easier from an operation POV. 16:29:34 do you have any prior experience with that? 16:29:56 right now I need to open a ticket for creating a database for a new metrics-web module. 16:30:23 would we expect to merge any of the schemas? 16:30:35 i.e. share tables between modules? 16:30:36 not in the near future. 16:30:49 well, 16:31:07 what we might do is add tables shared by all schemas/databases. 16:31:17 like, a table with descriptor files we already imported. 16:31:25 that would be a separate schema then. 16:31:34 but, merging tables is not the primary goal. 16:31:44 ease of configuration, possibly ease of backup. 16:31:56 i can't think of any downside 16:32:09 okay. good to know. 16:32:26 I wasn't sure if was overlooking something obvious. will look closer. 16:32:40 thanks! moving on? 16:32:53 ok 16:32:57 * Improving OnionPerf operation (karsten) 16:33:16 cf. #29091 16:33:37 there is work in progress here 16:33:40 I don't think we can automate this before the hack week. 16:34:00 i was talking with hiro about maybe redoing the existing deployments in march/april with the new code 16:34:30 we use the system tor installed from debian package and also drop the webserver, plus there would be some new nagios tests 16:34:33 so, hmm, until then, would you mind taking a quick look every few days whether things are working okay? 16:34:51 i can look today, but then not for 2 weeks 16:35:29 ah, you mean you couldn't fix issues then. 16:35:35 right 16:35:48 (you could probably look at tor metrics and find that something's wrong, but then not do anything.) 16:35:59 yeah 16:36:00 could you ping hiro in such a case? 16:36:12 i can do that 16:36:25 that would be great! 16:37:08 thanks! moving on: 16:37:11 * Agenda for hack half week (karsten) 16:37:57 how about we add topics to the linked pad and talk about those topics next week? 16:38:08 I added the one we are drafting for network team there. One topic that would be good for the metrics team to be in is the privcount one. 16:38:18 gaba: yes, agreed. 16:38:24 ok 16:38:26 that sounds good 16:39:15 what's the K in CKAN? 16:39:21 knowledge 16:39:25 it's an open data portal 16:39:37 to solve the publishing of data and linking to other's data problem 16:39:50 I see. 16:40:01 https://ckan.org/ 16:40:07 (but it can wait, this is not an urgent thing) 16:40:20 where do you see the ckan thing? is that in the agenda? 16:40:26 on the pad. 16:40:29 i added it as a possible topic on the pad 16:40:35 ahhh, ok 16:40:36 the hackweek pad. 16:40:44 to publish data from tor? 16:40:56 ckan is usually used for open data related to civic tech and government 16:41:01 tor metrics data and research data from tor 16:41:13 ahh, ok 16:41:25 that could then be hacked up with civic data to see things like how popular is tor in countries that have X level of development 16:41:44 yes, it could be interesting 16:42:04 it is good that you've heard of it 16:42:13 this means it must be a thing people use 16:42:16 (or hate) 16:42:20 yes, we used it in uruguay in the local gov in montevideo 16:42:27 yes, people use it AND hate it 16:42:31 yay 16:42:35 maybe it will be fun 16:42:42 regarding the pad, maybe add a few words to explain a topic. 16:42:56 otherwise these topics can be very broad, or not. 16:43:01 one question, the hackweek for metrics will be wednesday, thursday, friday. right? 16:43:20 half of wednesday, but yes. 16:43:38 I expect to arrive in the early afternoon. 16:43:49 i arrive on 27th 16:43:51 but irl will be around earlier. 16:43:52 i don't know what day that is 16:43:59 ahh, ok 16:44:05 27th is sunday 16:44:30 then if we do privcount together with both teams then it makes sense to do it on thursday 16:44:31 maybe there are topics that require the network team and _a_ metrics team person. those could possibly happen in the first half of the week. 16:44:33 and not wednesday 16:44:44 right, privcount should happen in the second half. 16:44:49 or we can do privcount only with irl? 16:44:53 ahh, ok 16:45:06 i think it would be good to have both me and karsten for privcount 16:45:28 maybe it would be good to know what we're talking about. 16:45:32 "privcount" is rather broad. 16:45:43 we talked about privcount for several years now. 16:45:52 the idea is for teor to give a presentation on what they are doing and then discussion 16:45:54 for talking to the network team, a timeline for bandwidth lists would be good to discuss 16:45:56 ahh, i see 16:46:02 i could do that without karsten if it helps 16:46:25 teor is working on privcount now 16:46:50 irl: sounds good to me. 16:47:09 just in case we feel we need to talk more, we could possibly schedule a second meeting. 16:47:56 okay. let's make more plans during this week and then discuss next week, okay? 16:48:26 karsten: if we need a second meeting i am planning to be in prague to present the safe measurement guidelines to the ietf in march 16:48:41 so i can fly to you or prague and then train to the other place and fly home 16:48:53 ah, I meant a second session in the second half of the hackweek. 16:48:57 ah ok 16:49:06 that is easier to arrange 16:49:19 heh :) 16:49:41 let's keep the prague thing in mind, just in case we need it. 16:50:10 alright, are we done for today's meeting? 16:50:16 one final topic 16:50:23 yes? 16:50:25 https://op-ab.onionperf.torproject.net/ 16:51:03 i think we can add this to collector 16:51:12 okay. I can do that. 16:51:19 awesome 16:51:26 that is all 16:51:28 maybe a quick ticket? 16:51:33 i'll do that now 16:51:35 mostly for documentation purposes. 16:51:40 great. I'll add it then. 16:51:48 great! 16:52:02 talk to you next week! bye. :) 16:52:08 bye! 16:52:10 #endmeeting