22:59:09 #startmeeting network team meeting, 19 february 2020 22:59:09 Meeting started Wed Feb 19 22:59:09 2020 UTC. The chair is ahf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 22:59:09 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 22:59:15 yoyoyo 22:59:21 hihi 22:59:27 o/ 22:59:27 hi 22:59:28 our pad is at https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-2020.1-keep 22:59:34 o/ nickm, gaba, catalyst 23:00:31 mikeperry: argh, sorry for removing your section earlier 23:00:48 let's start with: 23:00:51 Let's check and update our roadmap: What's done, and what's coming up? Use: https://dip.torproject.org/torproject/core/tor/boards 23:01:09 i have the feeling most people are in 0.4.3 land, so this will probably not be the biggest focus 23:01:15 ahf: no worries. I am in and out; still trying to figure out when to task switch between teams 23:01:24 mikeperry: :-) 23:01:24 * nickm moves #26768 to review 23:01:50 jnewsome: cool with all the shadow items! 23:01:53 * nickm moves #31851 to doing, since I made some progress on that 23:02:19 sweet 23:02:29 ahf: :) 23:02:40 the description for #5304 in "review" looks wrong? 23:03:15 yeah 23:03:19 it needs some love first 23:03:37 some of the things in review aren't currently needs_review 23:04:08 * teor is here 23:04:12 hi teor ! 23:04:13 Sorry, I lost track of time 23:04:22 o/ teor 23:04:43 okay, if everybody can go over their items in the review queue there and remove those that shouldn't be there, that would make things more readable 23:04:55 * ahf will do his when he is on a computer with his pw manager for GL on.. 23:05:07 we have so many reviews this week :o 23:05:21 #33374 is the only one with nobody assigned as reviewer 23:05:32 I'm sorry, I'm confused by the use of trac and gitlab at the same time 23:06:12 teor: no worries, i think we all mess that up every now and then 23:06:41 hiro is working on the new GL instance to tor this week, which timewarps us one step forward with all of that 23:06:59 mikeperry: if you're able to access dip, there are some things you worked on in the "review" column that I think are actually under needs_revision? 23:07:37 oh is dip now canonical for needs_review? I was looking at trac queries for that 23:07:46 trac is canonical 23:07:54 but we try to keep the columns in that dip query up to date 23:08:01 nobody much likes it, but it helps ahf and gaba 23:08:20 https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/query?reviewer=~mikeperry&status=needs_review says no tickets 23:08:44 Are you able to see the dip query on the pad? these aren't ones you're listed as reviewer on 23:09:00 these are ones that you worked on the code on where dip misclassifies them right now 23:09:36 you mean the full boards view? 23:09:40 right 23:09:51 are folks OK with their reviews this week? 23:10:25 yup 23:10:51 * ahf grabs the last one without a reviewer 23:10:56 the ones I see there seem to not actually have anything for review.. is there a way we can bookmark query urls for stuff like this into dip? 23:11:24 we bookmark it by having a link in the pad 23:11:33 and the pad url doesn't change except for once a year 23:11:44 I have fixed two tasks which had the wrong status in dip 23:11:48 the boards view does not tell me my responsibilities at a glance 23:12:23 mikeperry: you need to filter it by assigned 23:12:23 I am not sure what to do other than click on every single ticket? 23:12:29 We should work out how to do something like "my reviews" in gitlab: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/user/teor#Reviews 23:12:36 yes 23:13:29 ahf: I'm happy with my reviews, I've done the urgent ones that nickm asked me to do 23:13:34 teor: sweet 23:13:49 Others may wait until Friday or Monday, because I'm buried deep in reachability testing right now 23:13:50 when I type @mikeperry in the box, the board becomes blank :/ 23:14:00 when I do "Reviewer: @mikeperry" it is also blank 23:14:30 it seems you do not have anything other than 29494 and 30992 in dip... 23:14:44 it's assignee: @mikeperry, but i don't see anything for you 23:15:04 Your trac is also empty: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/query?status=needs_review&reviewer=~mikeperry&col=id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=milestone&col=component&order=priority 23:15:15 ok. that's what I thought 23:15:31 okay, let's do 0.4.3 status: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTorReleases/043Status 23:15:51 hm, #33069 is in review but has no owner 23:16:03 ah, it's a volunteer 23:16:03 cool 23:16:05 ahf: no problem; it's from a volunteer 23:16:18 the big question for 0.4.3 here is: if we called maint-0.4.3 a release candidate tomorrow, what would we regret not fixing? 23:17:00 none of mine except the TROVE would be a catastrophe, but it is annoying bugs that happens for mobile folks 23:17:16 but a lot of them are in the nice to have department 23:17:27 are you considering that? :-) 23:18:13 Well, sure! Gnerally i would like us to be realistic about 0.4.3.x tickets, and defer stuff that we aren't going to do in the next week or three 23:18:29 * ahf nods 23:18:29 i think the only one of mine is an 043-should and i already determined it's probably an old bug (that we should fix anyway but at least it's not a regression) 23:18:52 #32622 ? 23:18:56 yeah 23:19:19 How much time do you think is remaining on that, and do you think it makes sense to move it into 044 if it's not a regression? 23:20:07 still needs diagnosis, and might need a more invasive change than we'd be willing to take on 043 (not sure though) 23:20:33 ok. I trust your decision on that, but feel free to ask if you're not sure 23:20:46 catalyst: question for you on one of my 0.4.3 tickets... 23:21:15 i think my TROVE and #32165 are my needs-to-be-fixed tickets for 0.4.3 23:21:17 catalyst: In #31078 you requested some documentation and clarity improvements. I outlined some ones that I think would improve the code clarity on that ticket, and teor acked them. 23:21:51 catalyst: Do you think I should move ahead with the renaming/documentation proposed there, or wait for you to give feedback? 23:22:17 https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/31078#comment:7 is the comment where I suggest the changes; teor and I discuss them below on the ticket 23:22:44 nickm: it looks like teor had further comments that you hadn't responded to? 23:23:10 I agree with teor's suggestions 23:23:38 and I'm happy to rename things again later if we come up with even better names :) 23:24:25 sorry, this is too big for me to comfortably answer right now 23:24:43 okay. So, I should wait on this? 23:25:09 I'm not in a hurry to do this, so I can wait if need be 23:25:10 nickm: teor probably shares overlapping concerns with me here so their suggestions are probably something i consider an improvement 23:26:03 ok. I can also go ahead and go with the plans, realizing that you may have additional comments later after you've thought about this for a while 23:26:36 I'm not asking for a permanent waiver here; just wondering if you think it's worthwhile me making what I (and teor I think) believe is an incremental improvement 23:27:55 but like I said, I'll wait a bit longer if you'd rather I did. 23:28:15 nickm: yeah, go ahead with teor's suggestions. next time i have a reason to touch that code, i can try to take notes about what parts of the naming make it hard to keep in my head 23:28:25 okay 23:28:29 thanks, catalyst! 23:28:38 cool! 23:28:50 are we OK with 0.4.3 things for now, nickm? 23:29:13 I think so 23:29:25 cool! 23:29:28 we have a discussion item 23:29:32 Want to help make Tor's CI faster? 23:29:32 I'm mainly focused on macOS Chutney, but making other jobs faster would also help: 23:29:35 https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2020-February/014162.html 23:29:35 from teor! 23:30:00 Oh I think that's maybe last week? 23:30:28 oh! 23:30:34 maybe! 23:30:36 I'm not working on that right now, but I'm happy to review others changes 23:30:46 sorry then, i thought i caught everything when i went over the pad diff 23:30:58 Also the chutney improvements I'm doing right now should speed things up. Fewer timeouts and retries. 23:31:15 is 23:31:16 asn: We seem to have accumulated a nice collection of circpad-related tickets/bugs: #33354, #33352, #32140, #30992 . But both me and Mike seem knees deep in other sponsored stuff. We need to create space and time to handle those issues. 23:31:22 also from last week then? i don't remember this item :o 23:31:26 We haven't had a meeting for about 10 days :-) 23:31:36 * ahf enables the time warp mode 23:31:45 #4631 is quite clever :) 23:32:06 no 23:32:08 this one is new! 23:32:26 okay, mikeperry maybe you are the best one in here to talk about this. it's very late in greece right now, so asn isn't around :-/ 23:33:24 yes; basically I messed up the shutdown path of circpad while trying to optimize machine turnover. 23:33:42 a complete fix is rather involved. I can do it, but the question remains about what to do in the meantime 23:34:03 demoting the loglines is safe, or at least it was for the cases last time I looked 23:34:14 it is something that should be properly fixed. More bugs may be hinding in there 23:34:46 who is seeing this warning -- circpad experimentors, or regular users/operators? 23:35:18 it might be the latter, esp if it is showing up in chutney. I think assuming it is the latter and treating it accordingly is a good plan 23:35:24 tor logs the warning in various chutney networks, and I think people are seeing it on the live network 23:35:48 I consider this pretty high priority at this point, for me, esp since regular chutney is triggering the warns 23:35:50 Hm. In that case, maybe you and asn can figure out if there is a fix in between "the complete fix" and "demoting the log messages"? Rather than demotion I'd even prefer rate-limiting 23:35:58 ok 23:36:05 should it be 043-should? 23:36:06 dgoulet sees it on a client on master: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/33354#comment:2 23:36:13 mikeperry: how is it in relationship to 0.4.3? 23:37:00 it might require a protocol bump to fix properly.. if it does, we might want to still only demote the messages for 043 23:37:45 but yeah, this is why I put myself back on the pad for this meeting 23:38:30 re #4631 would be nice if we could use shadow for test cases of these tricky-to-repro issues 23:39:19 jnewsome: I don't know if shadow can actually handle this one -- does shadow handle the case where a relay is overloaded in CPU, and so acts more slowly than it should? 23:39:25 it would indeed be cool though 23:39:55 I think you can configure networking delays; would that be sufficient? 23:40:13 jnewsome: not exactly -- clock skew might help though if you can make a relay's clock incorrect 23:40:20 mikeperry: let's call this ticket 043-should, then, where the 043 part is "figure out what the real fix is, and whether it applies to 0.4.3"? 23:40:32 (and at least do something to quiet the situation in 0.4.3) 23:40:32 ok 23:40:43 mikeperry: is #33354 the ticket to do this with? 23:40:56 Seems like something it could plausibly be made to handle, if it doesn't already 23:41:27 jnewsome: Reproducible errors would be helpful. Chutney isn't really designed for that. 23:41:58 Networking delays can make large votes upload late, so you shouldn't need clock skews. But testing clock skews is also important. 23:42:01 nickm: I suspect all these stem from cases I enumerated in #30992, and is triggered by machines spinning up and shutting down repeatedly on the circ. for #33354 and the others 23:42:19 so I'll probably use that one and dup the rest to it if so 23:42:32 what is the actionable item in this? mikeperry and asn talks together and makes a plan for this? asn is right now in s27 land for a bit longer 23:43:01 I'll dig into it. it's my mistake due to my optimization 23:43:34 ok, i've set the milestone and added 043-should on #30992 then 23:43:53 cool, yeah, sounds like something that we should have in mind with 0.4.3 23:44:23 i don't see anything in bold in the pad 23:44:28 does anybody have anything else we need to chat about? 23:45:10 mikeperry: please check the comment on #30992 and make sure I got it right :) 23:45:17 I'm modifying chutney a lot right now, please log failures if you see any 23:45:37 teor: cool! :-) 23:45:42 nickm: looks good! 23:45:44 I'll put that in the pad 23:45:57 now that i think of it the way i use chutney is that i pull the repo and then never update it 23:46:08 i guess that isn't the smartest thing to do 23:47:06 Tor will make you update soon, because tor uses a new chutney network 23:47:47 ah 23:47:50 that makes it easier 23:47:59 cool folks. i'm gonna close the meeting down now then 23:48:07 I don't deliberately do breaking changes ;-) 23:48:07 thank you all for showing up and happy hacking for the rest of the week! 23:48:11 #endmeeting