aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorNick Mathewson <nickm@torproject.org>2007-04-20 17:17:13 +0000
committerNick Mathewson <nickm@torproject.org>2007-04-20 17:17:13 +0000
commit5bb745e119c789404be2e96c1777b9bb829b5605 (patch)
tree07cb0d911a7c19eff470c257e1fa797cc606c46e
parent0843b43bc278a605c3ce488eb937fb7deee6be04 (diff)
downloadtorspec-5bb745e119c789404be2e96c1777b9bb829b5605.tar.gz
torspec-5bb745e119c789404be2e96c1777b9bb829b5605.zip
r12760@Kushana: nickm | 2007-04-20 11:23:21 -0400
Describe a simpler implementation for proposal 108, and note some limitations in the proposal. svn:r9993
-rw-r--r--proposals/108-mtbf-based-stability.txt23
1 files changed, 19 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/proposals/108-mtbf-based-stability.txt b/proposals/108-mtbf-based-stability.txt
index 0023df0..0424b1e 100644
--- a/proposals/108-mtbf-based-stability.txt
+++ b/proposals/108-mtbf-based-stability.txt
@@ -23,17 +23,17 @@ Spec changes:
Replace the current rule for setting the Stable flag with:
- "Stable" -- A router is 'Stable' if it is active and its observed MTBF
- for the past month is at or above the median MTBF for active routers.
+ "Stable" -- A router is 'Stable' if it is active and its observed Stability
+ for the past month is at or above the median Stability for active routers.
Routers are never called stable if they are running a version of Tor
known to drop circuits stupidly. (0.1.1.10-alpha through 0.1.1.16-rc
are stupid this way.)
- MTBF shall be defined as the mean length of the runs observed by a
+ Stability shall be defined as the mean length of the runs observed by a
given directory authority. A run begins when an authority decides
that the server is Running, and ends when the authority decides that
the server is not Running. In-progress runs are counted when
- measuring MTBF.
+ measuring Stability.
Issues:
@@ -44,3 +44,18 @@ Issues:
Surely somebody has done this kinds of thing before.
+Alternative:
+
+ "A router's Stability shall be defined as the sum of $alpha ^ d$ for every
+ $d$ such that the router was not observed to be unavailable $d$ days ago."
+
+ This allows a simpler implementation: every day, we multiply yesterday's
+ Stability by alpha, and if the router was running for all of today, we add
+ 1.
+
+Limitations:
+
+ Authorities can have false positives and false negatives when trying to
+ tell whether a router is up or down. So long as these aren't terribly
+ wrong, and so long as they aren't significantly biased, we should be able
+ to use them to estimate stability pretty well.