Delivery-Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 19:33:36 -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_SIGNED,
	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 D8B621E0C69;
	Mon,  4 Aug 2014 19:33:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B81F92EDF6;
	Mon,  4 Aug 2014 23:33:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62FD82EDF6
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon,  4 Aug 2014 23:33:28 +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 q6NyVugCv9ih for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Mon,  4 Aug 2014 23:33:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.bitmessage.ch (mail.bitmessage.ch [146.228.112.252])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EB5C62C9FC
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon,  4 Aug 2014 23:33:27 +0000 (UTC)
dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=bitmessage.ch; s=mail;
 c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt;
 h=From:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To:References;
 bh=ICfRQgIdu1lAM8rE04vqoqIyXiD8B6/Btwt+RFGMHPA=;
 b=PNUK5T85UkJB7ZwnsTAnsbkewy3ULnxi/fn5njb54e71p1S5MvIUsmIfCExw+Dus8yHeQBl8BBa8USiAKxulhkk9GASVae1erUb3pw/vPaUTpXepJ5Dgb1IigZJxZ5VIpa3z7fSv/TwpMJlLUT5z/oU3WfEm0dPDO8SHR4JrZbI=
Received: from 127.0.0.1 (BITMESSAGE [127.0.0.1]) by mail.bitmessage.ch
 ; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 01:32:19 +0200
Message-ID: <53E01838.5040703@bitmessage.ch>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 23:33:12 +0000
From: Nusenu <BM-2D8wMEVgGVY76je1WXNPfo8SrpZt5yGHES@bitmessage.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
References: <53DAB8B4.1080403@bitmessage.ch> <53DFDBC1.40200@torproject.org>
In-Reply-To: <53DFDBC1.40200@torproject.org>
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] understanding metrics bw graphs
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>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

>> I would have a question regarding the bw-flags graphs on
>> metrics.tpo [1]
>> 
>> "guard bw history" a) Does this include the entire accumulated
>> traffic of relays having the guard flag? (which would include the
>> traffic of a guard relay acting as a middle or exit relay - if it
>> also has the exit flag)
>> 
>> or
>> 
>> b) Does this only and exclusively include the entire accumulated 
>> traffic that *enters* the tor network via all guard relays? (to
>> actually do that the traffic accounting on relays would have to
>> do accounting accordingly on a per connection type level)
> 
> a) is correct.
> 

Thanks for your answer.

>> Which would bring me to the next question (which would be
>> required to actually do the required accounting for (b)): Is a
>> relay able to tell whether it is being used as first or second
>> hop solely by looking at packets (not their source)?
> 
> Looking at the packet source and comparing it to the list of known 
> relays would probably be the most reliable way for counting bytes
> as first or second hop.  But this is not implemented, and there are
> plans to implement this, to the best of my knowledge.

If relays are unable to tell in which position they are used, how does
AllowSingleHopExits work? I guess by simple checking if the client IP
matches an IP in the consensus?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=iUfE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
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

