16:58:37 <ahf> #startmeeting network team meeting october 31 2020
16:58:37 <MeetBot> Meeting started Tue Oct 13 16:58:37 2020 UTC.  The chair is ahf. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:58:37 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:58:39 <ahf> hello everybody
16:58:45 <ahf> our pad is at https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-netteam-2020.1-keep
16:59:11 <asn> o/
16:59:16 <ahf> o/
17:00:30 <nickm> hi hi!
17:00:47 <dgoulet> o/
17:01:05 <ahf> let's check our board folks: https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/core/-/boards
17:02:17 <ahf> does things look OK there? :-)
17:02:31 <asn> i probs need to assign myself to the CBT experiment ticket
17:02:59 <asn> ah david is already assigned there
17:03:05 <asn> ok ok
17:04:02 <asn> im good
17:04:13 <ahf> buenos
17:05:14 <ahf> looks like we have no unassigned 0.4.4 tickets now
17:06:10 <ahf> reviewers haven't been assigned yet, right?
17:06:22 <ahf> think i see 4 tickets there
17:06:24 <asn> no
17:06:27 <asn> will do so after the meeting!
17:07:37 <ahf> buenos
17:07:44 <mikeperry> re Doing: wrt s61, O1.2 is unlikely to get much work this week/month. We should focus on o1.1 and O4.1 IMO
17:07:48 <mikeperry> (on the board)
17:08:08 <mikeperry> I have been trying to update the board and s61 but I can't seem to reorder items on boards
17:08:26 <ahf> yeah, i think they just have ID ordering in the columns
17:09:00 <ahf> are we good with https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/team/-/wikis/NetworkTeam/CoreTorReleases ? i think dgoulet found some conversion error on the page during last week
17:09:14 <dgoulet> we were off by 2 months in 046 ...
17:09:38 <gaba> mikeperry: ill take 1.2 to the backlog
17:09:42 <ahf> dgoulet: ah
17:11:16 <ahf> nickm: how did the backporting go last week? it wasn't too much or it all went fine or?
17:11:27 <nickm> went fine!
17:11:34 <nickm> left a few things unbackported, but I think we'll be fine
17:11:48 <nickm> if anybody wants to look at what's left and tell me if anybody whether you think I should backport more...
17:11:55 <nickm> ...or mark stuff as never-backport...
17:11:58 <nickm> that'll be fine
17:12:05 <nickm> or just ignore and I'll keep moving :)
17:12:14 <ahf> https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=opened&label_name[]=Backport is the list folks
17:13:03 <ahf> i think tor!33781 might be something i want to see bake a bit longer
17:13:11 <ahf> tor#33781
17:13:55 <nickm> yeah. it helps people, but it is also a pretty fundamental change
17:14:26 <ahf> tor#33131 is not worth the work i think
17:15:14 <nickm> ok by me; feel free to close?
17:15:21 <ahf> gonna close both then
17:15:22 <nickm> (with explanation ideally)
17:15:32 <dgoulet> as I said last week, I'm fine with those not being backported
17:15:46 <asn> ack
17:15:52 <ahf> dgoulet: the set is smaller now so if you said it last week it was about a much larger set :-P
17:16:05 <dgoulet> ahf: well I just looked at the new set?
17:16:08 * ahf will comment after the meeting
17:16:20 <ahf> and close :o
17:16:44 <ahf> ok next topic is S61: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/40143
17:17:02 <ahf> gaba / mikeperry, are you two running this one?
17:17:13 <ahf> mike had a comment above related to s61
17:17:19 * gaba checking -- sorry im also in the grants meeting
17:18:04 <gaba> yes, I added that item for confirming the work that is happening for s61 this week
17:18:36 <mikeperry> yes. this month we are focusing on https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/40150 and hopefully also https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/40158
17:19:04 * asn looks at #40158
17:19:20 <mikeperry> for O1.1, the sub-sub-item is https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/40157
17:19:35 <dgoulet> yeah #40158 will require a proposal I think
17:19:48 <mikeperry> with that kind of data collection, we will be able to retroactively test Fast and Guard cutoffs using onionperf filters on that data
17:20:00 <mikeperry> dgoulet: it should be tagged as such
17:20:03 <asn> ye #40158  proposal for sure
17:20:16 <asn> if not a proper one (because it's not gonna go upstream) at least a small one for us to implement it
17:20:27 <dgoulet> there
17:20:27 <asn> s/because/if/
17:20:27 <mikeperry> It's tagged with "Proposal Ideas" not sure if there is another tag it should have
17:20:36 <dgoulet> "Needs Proposal" ... I just labeled it
17:21:39 <ahf> perfect
17:21:55 <ahf> anything else here for today?
17:21:56 <mikeperry> O1.1 will also have some KIST experiments FYI. still need to make a ticket for that, but that work can wait until we start work on congestion control anyway
17:22:14 <dgoulet> ack
17:22:30 <dgoulet> likely shadow then?
17:23:16 <ahf> have you gotten somewhere to run the experiments on?
17:23:42 <mikeperry> dgoulet: yeah we might need to also play with kist to raise the speed limit for clients. actually I will ask you a question later today about it
17:23:43 <asn> (brb)
17:24:14 <dgoulet> ack
17:24:15 <mikeperry> ahf: I have an onionperf machine that like dgoulets, went down. it can run client experiment, might not be beefy enough for shadow
17:24:27 <mikeperry> but I am not thinking of starting on shadow this month anyway
17:24:28 <ahf> oh man that sucks lol
17:24:30 <ahf> ok
17:24:41 <dgoulet> yeah shadow one will need ... RAM and CPU
17:24:47 <ahf> we can use the box that runs akka and ukko too if we have to. we can just disable the relays for a bit
17:24:54 <ahf> it has some 64gb of ram and some cpu
17:24:59 <ahf> iirc
17:25:57 <dgoulet> good stuff
17:25:59 <ahf> ok
17:26:17 <ahf> anything we need to talk about here: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/team/-/issues
17:26:30 <ahf> core/team#7 expired in end of september
17:26:35 <nickm> do folks want me working on code autoformatting?
17:26:43 <ahf> for core/tor ?
17:26:46 <nickm> I think we can close code/team#7
17:26:56 <dgoulet> I would say "not urgent" considering ongoing arti work :)
17:26:58 <ahf> let's do that
17:26:58 <dgoulet> my two cents
17:27:03 <nickm> yeah, for core/tor.  I've been treating that as back-burnered, but I know we we had it planned
17:27:11 <nickm> ok
17:27:15 <ahf> yeah, i also don't think it's urgent, but if you have a lot of it in some branch from s31 then i'd say go for it if it's not a lot of work
17:27:22 <dgoulet> yah
17:27:27 <nickm> I'll see what's pending
17:27:31 <ahf> cool \o/
17:27:44 <dgoulet> and what is up with ? https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/team/-/issues/14
17:27:47 <dgoulet> just "pending" mode :) ?
17:28:02 <ahf> we haven't made progress with that one :-/
17:28:04 <gaba> pending for now
17:28:06 <dgoulet> ok
17:28:10 <gaba> It is on my plate to continue
17:28:18 <dgoulet> sounds good
17:28:27 <ahf> core/team#2 is being discussed in the tools grups too i think
17:28:44 <ahf> ok!
17:29:01 <ahf> now comes the thing where i need some help
17:29:12 <ahf> was "from exploration to implementation: let's discuss experimental branches and what to expect." from discusion items added for today's meeting?
17:29:15 <ahf> and by who?
17:29:32 <ahf> and also the next item in the list: can we remove expired milestones like https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/milestones/50 ?
17:30:06 <dgoulet> can I engage on the milestone discussion ? :)
17:30:17 <gaba> sorry, we can remove the first one
17:30:39 <ahf> dgoulet: sure
17:30:39 <gaba> yes, on the milestone one
17:30:53 <ahf> ok, they are added for today. thanks gaba!
17:31:00 <dgoulet> the -final one we still use them for backport
17:31:10 <dgoulet> but any EOL, I'm all for deletion :)
17:31:52 <ahf> sounds fine to me too. they are all in the legacy/trac one for the very old stuff too iirc
17:32:16 <dgoulet> yeah so to answer the question, I will say "no" since 044-final is still supported and used for backports
17:33:01 <ahf> yep
17:34:18 <gaba> if we do not close the milestone then let's change the expiration date
17:35:02 <dgoulet> fine by me
17:35:13 <ahf> ditto
17:35:25 <dgoulet> there done
17:35:33 <ahf> ok
17:35:54 <ahf> on thursday we have our team meeting with another proposal (prop#327)
17:36:01 <ahf> who wants to do the initial explaining of it?
17:36:08 <asn> (i can)
17:36:15 <ahf> did you write it?
17:36:18 <asn> could be
17:36:28 <ahf> maybe someone else of us then lol
17:36:37 <asn> aight
17:37:18 <ahf> i think dgoulet did it two times ago, i did it last time. maybe nickm this time if that is OK?
17:37:26 <dgoulet> I wrote an appendix of that proposal :S
17:37:28 <ahf> our N is pretty small ahaha
17:37:35 <dgoulet> but wait
17:37:46 <ahf> ?
17:37:51 <dgoulet> will that proposal be implemented anytime soon? asn ?
17:37:54 <gaba> do you want to do this meeting for the proposal open for more people?
17:37:58 <dgoulet> in order words, we do need to discuss it?
17:38:11 <ahf> we gave this one a date a while ago
17:38:13 <ahf> like 4 weeks ago
17:38:22 <asn> dgoulet: i think it depends where all this thing with the tokens go etc.
17:38:35 <asn> because if we start doing tokens, perhaps we could use tokens as a first step instead of PoW
17:38:45 <asn> so yeah it's a good question of whether we need to discuss it
17:38:48 <asn> compared to other things
17:39:11 <asn> so like given s61 im not sure if we have the capacity to also do pow given our team size
17:40:04 <ahf> do we want to postpone it? i think it's not good that we have a proposal at each of these thursday meetings
17:40:07 <ahf> it takes a whole hour
17:40:12 <dgoulet> yeah
17:40:14 <asn> sounds good let's postpone it
17:40:17 <ahf> maybe skip proposal this time and talk about next steps?
17:40:18 <dgoulet> I would get behind asn's opinion
17:40:34 <ahf> ok
17:40:34 <ahf> great
17:40:38 <dgoulet> things are moving fast at the moment in the token world so
17:40:50 <ahf> i don't see anything in bold in the pad otherwise
17:40:56 <ahf> anything else we need to chat about?
17:41:00 <asn> im good
17:41:03 * dgoulet is good
17:41:10 <dgoulet> ahf: here is your chance to delete it all! :D
17:41:12 <nickm> sorry - was distracted. I can do the explaining
17:41:25 <nickm> (when we do talk about it)
17:41:26 <ahf> nickm: we skip this proposal study group on thursday
17:41:33 <ahf> so no need to prepare anything
17:41:44 <ahf> and then we figure out the next proposals on thursday i think
17:41:52 <asn> great
17:42:09 <asn> fantastic
17:42:10 <ahf> ok i am gonna close the meeting then folks
17:42:19 <ahf> happy hacking until our usual meeting on thursday!
17:42:22 <ahf> #endmeeting