On Mo, Jul 08 2013, grarpamp wrote: >> From the paper by Murdoch and Zieliński [3]: >> [3] http://www.freehaven.net/anonbib/#murdoch-pet2007 >> “We suggest that existing models, based on Autonomous System (AS) >> diversity, do not properly take account of the fact that while, at >> the AS level abstraction, a path may have good administrative domain >> diversity, physically it could repeatedly pass through the same >> Internet eXchange (IX).” > > It would be interesting to include a traceroute service in each node > such that path building might take into consideration such IX/AS > repetitions over the proposed full path. Note however that MPLS > routing used to engineer traffic schemes can hide the actual path > from traceroute (though mitigated by its usual use only within one AS). > And other than of geolocation, it's quite hard to align IX nodes with > traceroute data.
Thanks a lot for bringing up this topic. Actually, there is a 2009 paper exploring the IX structure [1]. Their data set is published at [2]. Being German I restricted EntryNodes to DE and ran traceroutes to the 3 German guards selected by my Tor client. Two of those traceroutes showed IP addresses of DE-CIX (so I don’t want them), while the third one does not contain any IP address of [2]. I guess I’ll check that out systematically to find “my” EntryNodes. When restricting Tor nodes by country, I recommend to update src/config/geoip first. E.g., zeller is listed as German node with Tor v0.2.3.25 (where geoip dates back to May 2012), but lies in Seattle [3], which can be corrected with a new MaxMind download. > [Somewhere in all of this there is something to be said for peer > owned p2p meshnets and co-op's...] Definitely. Best wishes Jens Footnotes: [1] http://www2.research.att.com/~bala/papers/imc09-ixp.pdf [2] http://www-rp.lip6.fr/~augustin/ixp/ [3] http://zeller.torservers.net/ _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
