Delivery-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 06:05:36 -0400
Return-Path: <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on moria.seul.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Original-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (eugeni.torproject.org [38.229.72.13])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 962481E0A66;
	Tue, 12 Aug 2014 06:05:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A4CE3072A;
	Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:05:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB67830266
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:05:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eugeni.torproject.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (eugeni.torproject.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id ZBYTg5W2LHPw for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:05:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::230])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81F0D30632
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:05:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id bs8so5579641wib.3
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 03:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
 :content-type; bh=K3vC0wfuNVQ5ogZJwW7F2P6Ylp1s0ps+uCKtWuYsTs0=;
 b=cG9EIvI8IlgUqkHFrE4lavghFUvp1GTk/JG2noXnZrBt9IXV3nasrWpUT8NICp7g2U
 3AiyvfJrc6QNUMXkU/BLR2/+kWug0ZROxhXsN+SaHLCzDSpBF50DDzxtl9J8LsRO+gb7
 ggZXPuiBi7+wVfI7viOoeTD1Vyd2Nzcwq8QeYSIA62vulGTZQ9IJhazFUPX58T2Co1eA
 s7Zf33+KGiHT3ihmvMZ8v/BkPVRi5ZDOB32+nMKH6it5aADHyI+USDNgrj8KHbUE3hR4
 rS7K0Ri6tnzNPLRteF55e8z3d1tiZ+Dmpnvcn0DsKxK7M9awoT/RVOB45RkBcBdjLdE7
 dymw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.108.13 with SMTP id hg13mr32503280wib.28.1407837924506; 
 Tue, 12 Aug 2014 03:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.221.12 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 03:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKMgAkTRLc0YyDqO+LSb3ptHp=aHCPTQZz+sMPFeYNCzORe0-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKMgAkTDBMBnOksQ7U_xdOnOwXBbpoxDBAQZD=jm4_j=smQZbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140805165756.GC18371@localhost>
 <CAKMgAkTRLc0YyDqO+LSb3ptHp=aHCPTQZz+sMPFeYNCzORe0-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 19:05:24 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKMgAkRqSDo6Q6p7HPh7krgBQbDqq-wUfjsd3w8ME80J2M0Mng@mail.gmail.com>
From: saurav dahal <dahal.saurav@gmail.com>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Why adding Guard-Exit (EE) node in Tor yeild more
 catch probability than adding guard and exit node separately?
X-BeenThere: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
List-Id: "all discussion about theory, design,
 and development of Onion Routing" <tor-talk.lists.torproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/>
List-Post: <mailto:tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

Hello,

The following is the default Tor network in shadow simulator:

Total BW of Guard flagged nodes=258.15 MB/S
Total BW of Middle nodes=23.69 MB/S
Total BW of Exit flagged nodes=13.23 MB/S
Total BW of Guard+Exit flagged nodes=213.4 MB/S

Now, I inserted 40 guard nodes and 40 exit nodes, each of 5 MB/S in above
Tor network and performed the simulation.

Following are the bandwidth weights derived from the consensus document
when Guard and Exit nodes of 5MB/S are added separately:


Wbd=1454 Wbe=0 Wbg=4882 Wbm=10000 Wdb=10000 Web=10000 Wed=7091 Wee=10000
Weg=7091 Wem=10000 Wgb=10000 Wgd=1454 Wgg=5118 Wgm=5118 Wmb=10000 Wmd=1454
Wme=0 Wmg=4882 Wmm=10000


Then again, I added 80 Guard-Exit (EE) nodes, each 5MB/S and perform the
simulation.


Following are the bandwidth weights derived from the consensus document
when EE nodes of 5MB/S are added:


Wbd=4722 Wbe=0 Wbg=0 Wbm=10000 Wdb=10000 Web=10000 Wed=4826 Wee=10000
Weg=4826 Wem=10000 Wgb=10000 Wgd=452 Wgg=10000 Wgm=10000 Wmb=10000 Wmd=4722
Wme=0 Wmg=0 Wmm=10000


I calculated catch probability in both cases and found that the 2nd case
yields more probability.


By examining the above weights, how it is possible that the catch
probability for EE nodes are much higher than those of guard and exit node
separately? OR is there any other reason for this?


Can anybody please explain this?


Thanks,


On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:20 AM, saurav dahal <dahal.saurav@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Matt,
>
> If I understand correctly, you ran a simulation where you had x nodes
> which had the Guard flag and y exit nodes..
>
> Yes.
>
> then you ran another simulation where you had (x+y) exit nodes which also
> had the Guard flag? Is this correct?
>
> No.
>
> In simulation, there is node which has both Guard and exit flag, so called
> guard-exit node (EE node). I put (x+y) EE node and ran the simulation.
>
> Please refer to the shadow wiki below
>
> https://github.com/shadow/shadow/wiki/Using-the-scallion-plug-in
>
> Here you can see Guard+Exit relays.
>
> Thanks,
> Saurav
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Matthew Finkel <matthew.finkel@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 10:40:17AM +0900, saurav dahal wrote:
>> > I am trying to observe the catch probability i.e. probability that a
>> client
>> > selects my added guard as well as exit node while making a circuit.
>> >
>> > First I inserted certain number of guard nodes and certain number of
>> exit
>> > nodes in Tor network and performed the simulation in Shadow simulator.
>> > After completion of simulation, I calculated the catch probability.
>> >
>> > Then again I added the same number of Guard-Exit (EE) node and perform
>> the
>> > simulation and calculated the probability.
>> >
>> > I found that catch probability for EE nodes are much higher than those
>> of
>> > guard and exit node separately.
>> >
>> > Could anyone please explain why this happened?
>>
>> Hi Saurav,
>>
>> Can you clarify what you mean by Guard-Exit nodes? If I understand
>> correctly, you ran a simulation where you had x nodes which had the
>> Guard flag and y exit nodes, then you ran another simulation where
>> you had (x+y) exit nodes which also had the Guard flag? Is this
>> correct?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Matt
>> --
>> tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
>> To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Saurav Dahal,
> Wireless communication and Networking lab,
> Dept. of Computer Engineering,
> Chosun University,
> 309 Pilmun-daero, Dong-gu
> Gwangju, 501-759 S.KOREA
>



-- 

Saurav Dahal,
Wireless communication and Networking lab,
Dept. of Computer Engineering,
Chosun University,
309 Pilmun-daero, Dong-gu
Gwangju, 501-759 S.KOREA
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

