Clarifications to network bug triage process.

net/docs/bug-triage-suggested-workflow.txt

+Look for new crashers:
+* Go to go/chromecrash.
+* For each platform, look through the releases for which releases to
+  investigate.  As per bug-triage.txt, this should be the
+  most recent canary, the previous canary (if the most recent is less
+  than a day old), and any of dev/beta/stable that were released in the
+  last couple of days.  
+* For each release, in the "Process Type" frame, click on "browser".
+* At the bottom of the "Magic Signature" frame,  click "limit 1000".
+  Reported crashers are sorted in decreasing order of the number of reports for
+  that crash signature.
+* Search the page for "net::".  
+* For each found signature:
+  * If there is a bug already filed, make sure it is correctly
+    describing the current bug (e.g. not closed, or not describing a
+    long-past issue), and make sure that if it is a net:: bug, that
+    it is labeled as such.  
+  * Ignore signatures that only occur once, as memory corruption can
+    easily cause one-off failures when the sample size is large
+    enough.
+  * Ignore signatures that only come from a single client ID, as
+    individual machine malware and breakage can also easily cause
+    one-off failures.  
+  * Click on the number of reports field to see details of
+    crash. Ignore it if it doesn't appear to be a network bug. 
+  * Otherwise, file a new bug directly from chromecrash.  Note that
+    this may result in filing bugs for low- and very-low- frequency
+    crashes.  That's ok; the bug tracker is a better tool to figure
+    out whether or not we put resources into those crashes than a snap
+    judgement when filing bugs.
+* For each bug you file, include the following information:
+  * The backtrace.  Note that the backtrace should not be added to the
+    bug if Restrict-View-Google isn't set on the bug as it may contain
+    PII.  Filing the bug from the crash reporter should do this
+    automatically, but check.
+  * The channel in which the bug is seen (canary/dev/beta/stable),
+    its frequency in that channel, and its rank among crashers in the channel.
+  * The frequency of this signature in recent releases.  This
+    information is available by:
+    * Clicking on the signature in the "Magic Signature" list
+    * Clicking "Edit" on the dremel query at the top of the page
+    * Removing the "product.version='X.Y.Z.W' AND" string and clicking
+      "Update".
+    * Clicking "Limit 1000" in the Product Version list in the
+      resulting page (without this, the listing will be restricted to
+      the releases in which the signature is most common, which will
+      often not include the canary/dev release being investigated).
+    * Choose some subset of that list, or all of it, to include in the
+      bug.  Make sure to indicate if there is a defined point in the
+      past before which the signature is not present.
+
 Identifying unlabeled network bugs on the tracker:
 * Look at new uncomfirmed bugs since noon PST on the last triager's rotation:
     https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list?can=2&q=status%3Aunconfirmed&sort=-id&num=1000
 * Press "h" to bring up a preview of the bug text.
 * Use "j" and "k" to advance through bugs.
 * If a bug looks like it might be network/download/safe-browsing related, middle
     click [or command-click on OSX] to open in new tab.
 * If a user provides a crash ID for a crasher for a bug that could be
     net-related, look at the crash stack at go/crash, and see if it looks to be
     network related.  Be sure to check if other bug reports have that stack
@@ skipping 10 matching lines @@
 * If non-network causes also seem possible, attach those labels as well.
 
 Investigating Cr-Internals-Network bugs:
 * It's recommended that while on triage duty, you subscribe to the
     Cr-Internals-Network label.  To do this, go to
     https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/ and click on "Subscriptions".
     Enter Cr-Internals-Network and click submit.
 * Look through uncomfirmed and untriaged Cr-Internals-Network bugs, prioritizing
     those updated within the last week:
     https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list?can=2&q=Cr%3DInternals-Network+-status%3AAssigned+-status%3AStarted+-status%3AAvailable+&sort=-modified
+* If more information is needed from the reporter, ask for it and
+    add the 'Needs-Feedback' label.  If the reporter has answered an
+    earlier request for information, remove that label.
 * While investigating a new issue, change the status to Untriaged.
 * If a bug is a potential security issue (Allows for code execution from remote
     site, allows crossing security boundaries, unchecked array bounds, etc) mark
     it Type-Bug-Security.  If it has privacy implication (History, cookies
     discoverable by an entity that shouldn't be able to do so, incognito state
     being saved in memory or on disk beyond the lifetime of incognito tabs,
     etc), mark it Cr-Privacy.
 * For bugs that already have a more specific network label, go ahead and remove
     the Cr-Internals-Network label and move on.
 * Try to figure out if it's really a network bug.  See common non-network labels
@@ skipping 27 matching lines @@
     strongly suspect CLs.
 * If you are having trouble with an issue, particularly for help understanding
     net-internals logs, email the public net-dev@chromium.org list for help
     debugging.  If it's a crasher, or for some other reason discussion needs to
     be done in private, use chrome-network-debugging@google.com.
     TODO(mmenke): Write up a net-internals tips and tricks docs.
 * If it appears to be a bug in the unowned core of the network stack (i.e. no
     sublabel applies, or only the Cr-Internals-Network-HTTP sublabel applies,
     and there's no clear owner), try to figure out the exact cause.
 
-Look for new crashers:
-* Go to go/chromecrash.
-* For each platform, go to the latest canary.
-* In the "Process Type" frame, click on "browser".
-* At the bottom of the "Magic Signature" frame,  click "limit 1000".
-  Reported crashers are sorted in decreasing order of the number of reports for
-  that crash signature.
-* Search the page for "net::".  Ignore crashes that only occur once, as
-    memory corruption can easily cause one-off failures when the sample size is
-    large enough.
-* Click on the number of reports field to see details of crash. Look at the
-    stack trace to confirm it's a network bug.
-  * If it is, and there's no associated bug filed, file a new bug directly from
-      chromecrash, looking at earlier canaries to determine if it's a recent
-      regression.  Use the most specific label possible.
-* The most recent Canary may not yet have a full day of crashes, so it may be
-    worth looking at more than one version.
-* If there's been a dev, beta, or stable release in the last couple days, should
-    also look at those.
+Monitor UMA histograms and gasper alerts.  For each Gasper alert that
+fires, determine if it's a real alert and file a bug if so.  
+* Don't file if the alert is coincident with a major volume change.
+  The volume at a particular date can be determined by hovering the
+  mouse over the appropriate location on the alert line.
+* Don't file if the alert is on a graph with very low volume (< ~200
+  data points); it's probably noise, and we probably don't care even
+  if it isn't.
+* Don't file if the graph is really noisy (but eyeball it to decide if
+  there is an underlying important shift under the noise).
+* Don't file if the alert is in the "Known Ignorable" list:
+  * SimpleCache on Windows
+  * DiskCache on Android.
+For each Gasper alert, respond to chrome-network-debugging@ with a
+summary of the action you've taken and why, including issue link if an
+issue was filed.  
 
 Investigating crashers:
 * Only investigate crashers that are still occurring, as identified by above
     section.  If a search on go/crash indicates a crasher is no longer
     occurring, mark it as WontFix.
 * Particularly for Windows, look for weird dlls associated with the crashes.
     If there are some, it may be caused by malware.  You can often figure out if
     a dll is malware by a search, though it's harder to figure out if a dll is
     definitively not malware.
 * See if the same users are repeatedly running into the same issue.  This can be
@@ skipping 17 matching lines @@
   * If a bug is over 2 months old, and the underlying problem was never
     reproduced or really understood:
     * If it's over a year old, go ahead and mark the issue as Archived.
     * Otherwise, ask reporters if the issue is still present, and attach the
         Needs-Feedback label.
 * Old unconfirmed or untriaged Cr-Internals-Network issues can be investigated
     just like newer ones.  Crashers should generally be given higher priority,
     since we can verify if they still occur, and then newer issues, as they're
     more likely to still be present, and more likely to have a still responsive
     bug reporter.