15:58:43 #startmeeting network-health 2024-02-05 15:58:43 Meeting started Mon Feb 5 15:58:43 2024 UTC. The chair is GeKo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:58:43 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 15:58:47 hello! 15:58:48 o/ 15:59:01 we have a pad over at the usual place: https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-nethealthteam-2023-keep 15:59:39 please add your items and mark stuff as bold if you want to talk about 16:01:07 o/ 16:03:37 alright 16:03:56 nothing else stands out, very nice 16:04:00 o/ 16:04:13 ggus: et al. we'll have out monthly bbb sync tomorrow 16:04:19 at 1600utc, just as a fyi 16:04:33 so we don't need to bring up any s112 related 16:04:40 items today 16:04:53 *monthly s112 bbb 16:04:59 matt[m]: hi 16:05:03 how are things going? 16:05:34 GeKo: ack! 16:05:46 I have 0.3.1 ready with the fixes planned for this week, gonna open a MR once 0.3.0 is merged 16:05:59 ok going to review 0.3.0 before the end of day 16:06:05 sorry for keeping you waiting 16:06:20 hiro: thanks! no worries 16:06:40 btw about that vm metrics thing that we were discussing last week 16:07:14 is that going to require auth in the future? I thought that we could simply return a 302 to the instance if it's going to be open in the future 16:08:21 oh no the idea is that we keep VM on the same machine as the api 16:08:23 and the DB 16:08:33 well the DB we might have to see... but VM I think is doable 16:10:02 I think that right now the APIs are having issues proxying because I'm first issuing a request to VM and then I'm streaming that request back to the user, which means that the entire request data is kept in memory before being sent back to the user 16:11:16 If VM is going to be public I think we could solve this by simply returning a 302 to VM so that the client is going to immediately receive the stream of data from VM and we don't have to do the heavy lifting with the APIs 16:11:45 Otherwise we'd have to think of something else for this particular case 16:11:57 uhm so I think the only issue with VM being pblic is that people query VM directly and they kill our service 16:12:39 so I am not sure we can make it public, or not right now, but we might think about it... 16:12:43 right 16:13:24 i wonder whether it would be helpful to have a ticket or something where we'd collect pros/cons to different options 16:13:42 yeah we can have an issue in the api repository 16:13:53 I'll open it before I review the MR 16:14:02 +1 16:14:09 thanks 16:15:10 hiro: so, the onionoo issue... 16:15:31 it seems we have no easy way to get good first_seen dates back? 16:15:54 well, we could look at the bandwidth history 16:16:00 yeah 16:16:13 that's a non-easy option in my opinion :) 16:16:29 compared to copying good out dirs over etc. 16:17:01 i am not sure whether the bw history is consensus-based, though 16:17:09 no it is not 16:17:16 i suspect we are already collecting bw history data once we are running our relay 16:17:23 if a relay was offline for a year we would still have history 16:17:39 well, that's fine for first_seen 16:17:45 yeah 16:17:56 i was more thinking about relays not being in the consensus until X 16:18:02 first_seen would start at X 16:18:11 while bw history probably before X 16:18:19 unless we want the first seen to be a consensus_based field, exactly 16:18:39 so first_seen would start to mean something different to what the spec is saying 16:18:43 at least for some time 16:18:52 until we switch back to the old model 16:19:15 maybe we can do it just to "reset" state 16:19:27 uhm 16:19:47 or maybe we could announce what happened 16:20:08 well, that to 16:20:09 and we live with that 16:20:31 for the old relays, sure 16:20:58 but we could treat new ones like they are supposed to be treated according to the spec 16:21:13 once the "old" ones are "reset" 16:21:36 like i would not keep just using the bw history from now on 16:21:53 as the new status quo 16:22:07 ah so you want to reset the old ones? 16:22:15 i thought so 16:22:16 I meant that we do a post mortem so to speak 16:22:46 and would go with bw history from now on? 16:22:51 nono 16:23:04 we just accept that a number of relays will have the first_seen date "wrong" 16:23:25 i think that's not so easy 16:23:33 it messes up my bad-relay work to begin with 16:23:41 ah I see 16:23:45 and folks keep showing up wondering what's up 16:24:06 then yeah we do the reset for the relays that got the first_seen date on the 10th of January 16:24:08 i think we need some kind of fix for the current situation 16:24:21 but we do that in text basically 16:24:21 and 29th of january 16:24:26 without changing the app 16:24:34 yeah 16:24:37 that's fine 16:24:44 we do a script to read the two documents and make the cahnge in the status 16:24:47 a bit hack-ish but still 16:24:53 yep 16:25:02 yep let's do it this week 16:25:05 I'll open the issue 16:25:05 +1 16:25:09 thanks 16:25:10 and follow up on that 16:25:20 i'll still want to understand what's going on here 16:25:28 so i'll try another couple of hours tomorrow 16:26:16 because i fear this might happen again as it did on jan 29th 16:26:29 and there is really weird shit going on with bridges :( 16:26:52 anyway, that's all from my side 16:26:59 do we have anything else for today? 16:27:07 * juga is good 16:27:09 ggus: you good? 16:27:28 * matt is good 16:28:18 hiro: anything else from your side? 16:28:41 * hiro is groot 16:28:59 GeKo: a quick thing 16:29:05 sure 16:29:16 GeKo: pavel announced the 0.4.7.x EOL on social media last week 16:29:28 good, good 16:29:37 what does social media means here? 16:29:47 x? something else? 16:29:51 on mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@torproject/111858473454854394 16:30:05 x/twitter: https://twitter.com/torproject/status/1753176545525658104 16:30:25 kk 16:30:43 and reddit 16:30:49 so we are good here and can get the real work going once i am back? 16:30:56 correct! 16:31:01 awesome 16:31:10 i pinned your topic on the forum 16:31:26 hiro: wanna pick up next week's nh meeting facilitation? 16:31:31 i'll be out 16:31:39 ggus: thanks! 16:31:39 sounds good 16:31:46 great 16:32:33 alright folks 16:32:43 it seems we are done for today/this week 16:32:49 thanks everyone and have a nice week! 16:32:52 #endmeeting