Codecov Report

Merging #1184 (751ddf1) into dev (66b9971) will increase coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 89.28%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev    #1184      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   55.46%   55.50%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         140      140              
  Lines       20239    20267      +28     
  Branches     4895     4897       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits        11225    11250      +25     
- Misses       6007     6008       +1     
- Partials     3007     3009       +2     

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 66b9971...751ddf1. Read the comment docs.

The v3bw file was supposed to be loaded by the authority. The tor.authority.torrc file has the following option:

V3BandwidthsFile shadow.data/hosts/torflowauthority/v3bw

Maybe we can just put the v3bw file in the 4uthority dir instead, and update this path? Or maybe we don't actually need the v3bw file after all? (I'm surprised that Tor does not fail since the above file no longer exists at the specified path.)

In full.config.yaml it does look like the torbridgeclient is using the 4uthority relay as the bridge instead of a separate bridge relay:

...--UseBridges 1 --Bridge 100.0.0.1:9111

So removing the bridge dir seems ok.

The v3bw file was supposed to be loaded by the authority. The tor.authority.torrc file has the following option:

V3BandwidthsFile shadow.data/hosts/torflowauthority/v3bw

Maybe we can just put the v3bw file in the 4uthority dir instead, and update this path? Or maybe we don't actually need the v3bw file after all? (I'm surprised that Tor does not fail since the above file no longer exists at the specified path.)

I added this file back.

In full.config.yaml it does look like the torbridgeclient is using the 4uthority relay as the bridge instead of a separate bridge relay:

...--UseBridges 1 --Bridge 100.0.0.1:9111

So removing the bridge dir seems ok.

Should I re-add the bridge and update the bridge line for torbridgeclient to use it?

Should I re-add the bridge and update the bridge line for torbridgeclient to use it?

I don't think we need it because the authority already fills the bridge role. I don't think we need a bridge that does not also act as an authority, but if you are excited to get that working and want to add it, go ahead.

Should I re-add the bridge and update the bridge line for torbridgeclient to use it?

I don't think we need it because the authority already fills the bridge role. I don't think we need a bridge that does not also act as an authority, but if you are excited to get that working and want to add it, go ahead.

I'm fine with leaving it out, just wanted to know if you had a preference.

@robgjansen Before merging, I'll disable the on: pull_request trigger for this action. There is also a commit specifically to show changes I made to the config files you sent me, so let me know if you don't agree with any of them.