Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 213: Remove stream-level sendmes from the design

2012-11-06 Thread Andreas Krey
On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 11:51:10 +, Julian Yon wrote: > On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 01:06:56 -0500 > Roger Dingledine wrote: > > > If we ripped out stream-level sendmes, then as you say, we'd have to > > choose between "queue all the data for the stream, no matter how big > > it gets" and "tell the whole

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 213: Remove stream-level sendmes from the design

2012-11-06 Thread Julian Yon
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 01:06:56 -0500 Roger Dingledine wrote: > If we ripped out stream-level sendmes, then as you say, we'd have to > choose between "queue all the data for the stream, no matter how big > it gets" and "tell the whole circuit to shut up". A possible compromise: A stream level XOFF/X

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 213: Remove stream-level sendmes from the design

2012-11-05 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 08:31:05AM +0100, Andreas Krey wrote: > 'Receiver of the stream does not read anymore, for whatever reason.' > > > With no per-stream window, the circuit will round-robin between the > > streams that want to send a cell, just as it does now. > > But where does the data go

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 213: Remove stream-level sendmes from the design

2012-11-04 Thread Andreas Krey
On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 02:01:21 +, Roger Dingledine wrote: > On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 06:57:48AM +0100, Andreas Krey wrote: > > With no per-stream window a single stalled stream would > > block the circuit forever. > > Wait, what? > > Can you define 'stalled' here? 'Receiver of the stream does

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 213: Remove stream-level sendmes from the design

2012-11-04 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 06:57:48AM +0100, Andreas Krey wrote: > With no per-stream window a single stalled stream would > block the circuit forever. Wait, what? Can you define 'stalled' here? I think you are misunderstanding the current (and proposed) design. With no per-stream window, the circ

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 213: Remove stream-level sendmes from the design

2012-11-04 Thread Andreas Krey
On Sun, 04 Nov 2012 18:31:51 +, Roger Dingledine wrote: ... > The circuit-level flow control, or something like it, is needed > because different users are competing for the same resources. But the > stream-level flow control has a different threat model, since all the > streams belong

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 213: Remove stream-level sendmes from the design

2012-11-04 Thread Roger Dingledine
On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 06:31:51PM -0500, Roger Dingledine wrote: > 2. Design > > We should strip all aspects of this stream-level flow control from > the Tor design and code. See also https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/4485 wherein I point to a git branch that implements this pa

[tor-dev] Proposal 213: Remove stream-level sendmes from the design

2012-11-04 Thread Roger Dingledine
Filename: 213-remove-stream-sendmes.txt Title: Remove stream-level sendmes from the design Author: Roger Dingledine Created: 4-Nov-2012 Status: Open 1. Motivation Tor uses circuit-level sendme cells to handle congestion / flow fairness at the circuit level, but it has a second stream-level