16:59:16 #startmeeting Network team meeting, 24 January 2022 16:59:16 Meeting started Mon Jan 24 16:59:16 2022 UTC. The chair is ahf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:59:16 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 16:59:18 hello hello 16:59:22 hello everybody! 16:59:40 pad is at https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-2022.1-keep 16:59:41 o/ 16:59:49 i just got out of a meeting so 2 sec then i'll be ready 17:00:10 o/ 17:00:20 o/ 17:00:25 hi 17:01:00 ok 17:01:14 how are folks doing with their boards? 17:01:15 hi 17:01:27 o/ 17:01:36 o/ 17:01:42 o/ 17:01:51 ahf: doing fine. GOing to run out of arti stuff in a bit, but when I do I'll confer with eta and Diziet :) 17:02:08 We have a fine backlog for you :-). 17:02:28 Hsv3? :P :P 17:02:28 LOL Diziet <3 17:02:29 * eta is doing okay 17:02:37 nickm: very nice 17:03:02 .msg dgoulet don't tell anybody about our secret weekend hacking sessions 17:03:04 ;) 17:03:19 hehe 17:03:24 ehhe 17:03:26 dgoulet: any updates on tor.git releases? 17:04:04 yes yes 17:04:08 0.3.5.18 releasing today 17:04:11 LAST ONE of the series 17:04:17 dying in 7 days 17:04:21 that is about it ;) 17:04:36 very nice, the chance of some critical bug arriving in the next week is probably above 9000% now then 17:05:10 I'll let mikeperry update us about 047 future and CC 17:05:12 * dgoulet done 17:05:23 let's do that in s61 17:05:25 ok 17:05:36 nothing bad coming in from other teams 17:05:43 (nothing good either, very neutral) 17:06:00 thanks all for being so fast at responding to the 1:1 meeting scheduling. i'll write out about that today/tomorrow 17:06:16 we have a discussion item from nickm: 17:06:18 [2022-01-24] Arti security policy needs finalization; we're discussing one paragraph. Are we all okay with https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/issues/237#note_2770790 or https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/arti/-/issues/237#note_2771607 ? -nickm 17:06:55 FWIW I am fine with either version, but since it's a team-policy issue it's best if we all agree 17:07:44 I gave a thumbs up earlier 17:08:08 IME with the Xen Project the scope of security policy stuff like this is mainly to decide "shall we issue an advisory", "shall we take the patch" type questions 17:08:18 i don't have a strong opinion about that :o 17:08:44 i think eta's last line is sensible and gives us a bit more freedom to decide in the situations? 17:08:49 We don't do advisories yet for arti I think ? So it's largely a question of what we intend, and what patches we'll take 17:09:48 I am fine with eta's wording. I think what that means is that if we *discover* an upstream vuln we at least might mention it somewhere or bump our Cargo.toml or something. 17:10:04 i hope you don't do advisories, but we have seen before with tor.git that people does CVE's "on us" with their own stuff that forces us to respond to something we care little about 17:10:10 And we would take a patch if it wasn't awful. 17:10:12 ya 17:10:25 ok. If everbody's okay with eta's version I'll merge it onto the wiki 17:10:30 cool 17:10:34 I intended it as "we take responsibility for our code and our dependencies as specified in Cargo.lock, but if you change dependency versions that's on you" 17:10:35 and call that a policy 17:10:49 yeah 17:10:52 ok, very good 17:10:57 mikeperry: wanna do s61 sync? 17:11:12 kk 17:11:35 so it has been a while since the last irc meeting 17:12:02 I have been finishing off the parameter tuning thanks to lots of extra runners via jnewsome's credit. pretty much done there 17:12:11 nice 17:12:34 dgoulet and I have exit and onion service negotiation branch. I ran a sim with it over the weekend (exit-only tho). it worked! 17:12:50 we will be preparing that for review and updating the spec this week 17:13:25 with that branch, the next round of sims will do various tests to ensure it is ready for an alpha 0.4.7 release: https://gitlab.torproject.org/mikeperry/tor/-/blob/cc_shadow_experiments_v2/SHADOW_EXPERIMENTS.txt#L868 17:13:29 (Round 5) 17:13:46 the main priority is making sure we sim onion services, which jnewsome has been working on 17:14:12 I need to look over that still tho 17:14:31 jnewsome: I am guessing the graphing onion service perf results still needs to be done? will that be hiro? 17:14:35 ok so we need more eyes on the negotiation code at some point this week? 17:14:53 mikeperry: that's my understanding 17:15:23 ahf: yeah. dgoulet is looking over my changes for onion service path length params, and then we will make an MR and mark it needs review 17:15:39 I will also update the spec with the new default params from simulation, which are also updated in that branch 17:15:46 the PR for adding onion service support to tornettools is ~done. just sent it back to Rob for review. And I have a PR+branch of our sims that use that, with some onion services added 17:15:51 sounds good 17:16:16 jnewsome: ok. this is for background traffic? can we tune the % of that? 17:16:35 it adds both bg traffic and perf clients. yes, it's tunable 17:16:40 nice 17:17:09 ah nice that rob is in on it too 17:17:10 cool 17:17:49 Gaba wrote a draft of the quarterly report and sent me a link. I see GeKo has some updates for it? 17:17:56 GeKo: do you have the links from gaba? 17:18:02 the nextcloud ones 17:19:17 yes 17:19:31 there are sections i need to fill in to O4 i think 17:19:38 and some indicators that are still missing 17:19:42 i'll address that tomorrow 17:19:53 the doc is at https://nc.torproject.net/s/2siCpFxXkzTASXp 17:20:06 ok. yeah, I am also not sure if Gaba filtered out the perf time periods from when we had the DoS and bad relay removals 17:20:19 i still did not. I also need some numbers from hiro 17:20:20 the indicators are at https://nc.torproject.net/s/HWNLp4Etf34tM9Z 17:20:55 yeah, i'll update the ticket for gaba, too 17:21:09 so we have the exact dates for those indicidents 17:21:26 i guess i'll do that direct after the meeting 17:21:43 I lost that ticket we were tracking those things in.. bleh 17:21:47 what was it again? 17:21:58 https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/network-health/team/-/issues/161 17:22:33 i am not sure how we want to deal with the censorship in russia part 17:22:34 ah great, thanks 17:22:44 that started like begin of december 17:22:57 but i am not sure if the potential perf impact is enough to get filtered out 17:23:21 hard to say without having done some analysis :) 17:23:29 hrm, yeah likely that did not make anything go haywire wrt perf 17:23:39 that would be my assumption, too 17:24:14 we did start getting some attacks again, but I think those weren't until Jan 17:24:27 i think so, yes 17:25:05 gaba: can you create an org-wide gitlab label "Performance Impact" where we can tag tickets with in different projects? 17:25:19 mikeperry: so for that ticket i think we should just take the first three items i listed 17:25:27 and go with those for this report 17:25:38 GeKo: yeah, that sounds good 17:26:20 geko: yes 17:26:40 anything else for today? 17:27:05 I think that's it. I will follow up with jnewsome and maybe hiro after 17:27:27 sounds good, please poke network-team in @tpo/core on GL when there is stuff to review 8) 17:27:41 ok, thanks all for the meeting. see you at our next sync on thursday o/ 17:27:45 #endmeeting