17:00:21 <phw> #startmeeting anti-censorship weekly checkin 2019-09-05
17:00:21 <MeetBot> Meeting started Thu Sep  5 17:00:21 2019 UTC.  The chair is phw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:21 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:22 * Samdney is watching during other work.
17:00:33 <phw> here's our meeting pad: https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-censorship-2019-keep
17:01:51 <phw> gaba: is the bug smash fund announcement yours?
17:02:16 <phw> i wonder if we should really tag *all* non-sponsor tickets with BugSmashFund?
17:02:30 <gaba> hi!
17:02:33 <gaba> yes
17:02:47 <gaba> we should tag all the tickets we are working on
17:02:50 <gaba> that are non-sponsor
17:02:55 <gaba> all bugs if possible :)
17:03:23 <phw> can we do this with a trac query? that is, select all tickets that don't have a sponsor and slap this tag on them?
17:04:06 <gaba> that could be but it would be good to get bugs that we are working in the near future
17:04:09 <gaba> so there is some progress
17:04:17 <gaba> the idea is to report some progress in future blogposts
17:04:37 <cohosh> is it just for ones categorizes as "defect"?
17:04:46 <gaba> yes
17:04:59 <cohosh> cool
17:05:28 <phw> ok, i'll keep that in mind
17:06:01 <gaba> ok
17:06:33 <phw> next item on our list is #19332
17:06:43 <gaba> I also added that one
17:06:53 <gaba> is just checking as we do not have that one in the roadmap
17:07:28 <phw> i see. i think it should be on the roadmap -- and it won't require a ton of work from our side
17:07:51 <phw> basically, we need to be doing some work with logrotate and apache on our side to expose bridgedb's metrics to the metrics team
17:08:32 <gaba> yes
17:08:33 <gaba> ok
17:08:37 <gaba> should we add it then?
17:08:38 <phw> i'll try to get this done in the next few days, so karsten can work on it next week
17:08:42 <gaba> ok
17:08:49 <phw> sure, let's add it
17:08:54 <gaba> no rush as karsten is busy with other things net week
17:10:03 <gaba> i just added it
17:10:08 <phw> thanks gaba
17:10:17 <phw> any more discussion items before we move on to the review section?
17:11:22 <phw> a brief announcement from my side: so far, we got ~40 new obfs4 bridges because of our bridge campaign
17:11:43 <phw> and a few people helped us find bugs in our setup guide. and somebody even contributed a new guide for fedora
17:12:00 <cohosh> nice \o/
17:12:07 <hiro> yay \o/
17:12:25 <cohosh> phw: approximately how many bridges are misconfigured where you have to follow up with them?
17:12:53 <cohosh> that would be interesting to keep track of
17:12:54 <gaba> nice!
17:14:16 <phw> cohosh: only a handful. i remember somebody following a third-party guide that didn't work, and somebody set up relays (!) that ran obfs4, which was also unexpected
17:14:55 <cohosh> woah
17:15:21 <phw> i think our guides are in really good shape now and we should keep it that way
17:15:34 <phw> ...and discourage people from publishing their own guides, and instead just point to ours
17:15:35 <cohosh> nice
17:16:29 <phw> ok, let's move on to reviews
17:16:42 <gaba> #31522 has no owner and no reviewer but is on review state
17:17:02 <phw> i only have one (#28533) and took the liberty of making cohosh the reviewer
17:17:17 <dcf1> I'll take #31522 out of review.
17:17:18 <cohosh> phw: cool
17:17:42 <gaba> ok
17:17:59 <cohosh> whoops, thanks dcf
17:19:08 <cohosh> i'd like some help with #31425 but i really don't know what we need there
17:19:35 <cohosh> i've followed some debugging steps but the problems are intermittent and don't seem to have anything to do with the actual broker code
17:19:44 <dcf1> I don't know there. I haven't experienced any slowness myself, other than what looks like high network latency.
17:19:55 <dcf1> Your idea about VM deprioritization may be correct.
17:20:22 <cohosh> We had a sysmon outage detected yesterday again when cypherpunks reported having problems
17:20:31 <cohosh> but i didn't catch it early enough to do more debugging
17:21:27 <dcf1> One option is to go ahead with moving the broker to the Amsterdam data center, which we were going to do for IPv6 anyway (#29258) and see if that fixes things.
17:21:48 <cohosh> i like that option since we are doing it anyway
17:22:18 <dcf1> The migration in #29258 is stalled because of a deadlock with the decision whether to move the broker to a TPA machine (can't find the ticket just now), but I think that's an anti-pattern.
17:22:23 <dcf1> No reason we can't do one now and the other later.
17:22:49 <cohosh> what is the cost of moving data centres?
17:23:04 <cohosh> if it's not a big effort, i think we should go ahead and move it now
17:23:05 <dcf1> Just the time it takes to set up a new machine.
17:23:24 <dcf1> Also a small bit of log file overlap that we'll have to figure out what to do with.
17:23:41 <cohosh> i think the vague decision of making it a TPA machine was: hold off on doing that until we have a really good reason to
17:24:13 <dcf1> #31232 was the ticket
17:24:55 <dcf1> Didn't find it at https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/Snowflake#Tickets 'cuz it was missing a snowflake keyword :)
17:25:28 <cohosh> thanks for fixing that :)
17:25:56 <dcf1> Okay, I'll comment on #31425 that the idea is to try the broker migration we were going to do for IPv6 and see if that helps. I'll try to get a bigger VM this time too.
17:26:05 <cohosh> yeah we keep sort of discussing this and then leaving it for later >.<
17:26:16 <cohosh> dcf1: sounds good, thanks!
17:27:16 <cohosh> dcf1: and since you run the current infrastructure, feel free to weigh in on moving it to TPA if you no longer wish to do that
17:27:47 <cohosh> i think we're on this "we don't run the network" vs. "what happens if we cant get ahold of you" trade off right now
17:29:04 <gaba> hiro: you do not have any review that needs to be added/discussed here?
17:29:09 <dcf1> This is also something you could usurp from me at any time if I were to disappear -- you would need to set up your own machine and push out a new release with new hostnames, but it wouldn't be broken permanently.
17:29:20 <cohosh> true
17:29:51 <cohosh> gaba: i put reviewing the metrics stuff for gettor on my tasks this week
17:29:59 <cohosh> (i think it's gitlab ticket 10 or something)
17:30:00 <gaba> ah, ok. thanks cohosh
17:31:39 <hiro> gaba: I am doing the ansible configuration and the docs at the moment
17:32:11 <gaba> ok
17:32:35 <hiro> I think I will need help reviewing the info on the website too
17:32:46 <hiro> before chaging what we have on gettor.tp.o
17:33:36 <hiro> but I am not writing any code atm
17:34:50 <phw> dcf1: i'll send a reminder to sina for #31455
17:35:27 <dcf1> If you do, Cc arma, who offered to get in touch last meeting.
17:35:33 <phw> gotcha
17:37:13 <phw> ok, are we done for today?
17:38:04 <gaba> can people quickly look at the roadmap and see that what you are working on and planning to work on is reflected there?
17:38:32 * phw nods
17:38:37 <gaba> and there are some stuff in the 'needs help with' section of each person. Not sure if you went through it phw
17:38:39 <cohosh> gaba: thanks for the reminder, doing that now
17:39:00 <gaba> thanks
17:40:07 <phw> hiro: i haven't heard from arma2 yet regarding archive.org
17:40:43 <hiro> ok
17:40:46 <phw> we can go ahead with uploading but let's not make gettor point people to archive.org just yet
17:40:49 <hiro> I can start setting up the account
17:40:56 <hiro> and prepare the upload scripts yes
17:41:10 <phw> and regarding gettor-web: do you need a review for the entire website, or just some changes?
17:41:46 <hiro> I have used the styleguide for the website.. I think I will need review for just the content of the main page which is the user doc
17:41:47 <phw> looks like it's the entire website (i haven't looked at the repo yet)
17:42:01 <hiro> the style is the same we use everywhere
17:42:10 <phw> ok, i'll review it
17:42:25 <dcf1> hiro: do you know the https://archive.org/details/@torproject account? That is what boklm plans to use for archiving archive.tpo. But for gettor maybe you want to structure the item/items differently.
17:42:54 <hiro> I know we ahve an account but I wasn't sure we should use the same or another one
17:43:13 <dcf1> hiro: yes, gettor is somewhat different and maybe should use a separate account.
17:43:29 <hiro> phw: please wait on the review tomorrow I will send some more update
17:43:36 <phw> hiro: gotcha
17:43:37 <hiro> I'll send a status update tomorrow
17:43:47 <dcf1> Especially as new Tor Browser releases are not yet uploaded automatically under @torproject.
17:45:15 <hiro> dcf1 will tor browser releases be updated to archive.org?
17:45:27 <hiro> because that's all we need for gettor
17:45:36 <hiro> so we might use the same account if that's the case?
17:45:41 <dcf1> hiro: I think that's the long-term plan but I don't think there are any plans to do it quickly, so better not to wait on it.
17:45:48 <hiro> ok
17:47:02 <phw> cohosh: do we have a reviewer for #29206?
17:47:16 <cohosh> phw: yep dcf1 is reviewing it
17:47:35 <phw> oh, good. did we miss any reviews?
17:48:31 <phw> i don't think so. let's end the meeting
17:48:33 <phw> #endmeeting