Re: [tor-relays] Proper bandwidth units [was: Exit nodes on Gandi]
> Yes, and the global internet uses IP packets whose length > is measured in bytes, not bits. On paper in an RFC, yes, displayed on the actual routing hardware as what you're pushing, no. > No, that's still bogus. The only reason the hardware guys talked about > bits/s was that that was the physical line limit, and that there was > no consensus about protocols, or how many bits shall constitute a byte, > or how many extra bits shall accompagny(sp?) the actual data. > > Nowadays bytes always have eight bits, it's always IP, and the transport > is (almost) always fully efficient so that a byte/s always translates into > eight bits/s. This isn't a question of line/protocol encoding. Network hardware ships databits around agnostic of that. > There is simply no more reason to talk in bits/s at all, > except that everyone is doing it. Obviously, because backbone people buy and sell to lower ISP's/hosters in bits/sec and your home line does too. That's from the birth of the net and trickles down, the actual choice and original rationale is moot, bits is what the upstream measures things in today. When you go to quote and plug in a large and 24x7 constant bandwidth service like Tor, I2P, torrent, VPN aggregator, etc the common language is often, and more easily to them, bits/sec. > break down the > TB/month my VPS provider gives me into bits/s or bytes/s. Neither is > as straightforward as a decimal shift. That's why real networks use bits/sec: it is precisely an SI prefix shift, with no 8 divisor/multiplier or 2^n involved anywhere. There's no ambiguity and no math, just simple clarity. VPS are by definition small, oversubscribed platforms, not generally suited to large dedicated services. VPS providers generally cater to the smaller apache style bytelog counting type customer. Not the larger full on network (vpn, tor, router) customer. And when we have people saying stuff like 'giga bits per month', it's clear that confusion is perpuating in the field quite well to the point you have no idea if they even know what their own datapoint is. Then you have to ask them to clarify their meaning, check their math, etc. We've got 100Mbit or more nodes out there and dinky 512kbit ones or less. For easy network reference, yes, people should use bits/sec across the board here. If they insist on using Byte/sec, at least use it right with SI 10^n prefix, not IEC 2^n prefix. And don't come up with some unusual combination of prefix/time as in the OP either. For example... A proper IEC gibibyte = GiB = 2^30 = 1024^3 = 1073741824 for data storage, ram (binary bit handling) A proper SI gigabyte = GB = 1E9 = 1000^3 = 10 for data transmission (packet counting, rocketships) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_8 http://www.swedeteam.com/kibi/ Thugh they may break your broken tradition, there are current standards now, please use them. ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Huge harrassment by Irdeto and IP-Echelon, 83 mails, in 2 weeks, need your help
Is there a document somewhere I can refer my ISP to showing that other ISPs have decided to blackhole Irdeto/IP-Echelon complaints? -Pascal On 11/13/2013 4:50 PM, Moritz Bartl wrote: Hi, One of our ISPs has decided to simply blackhole all complaints coming from Irdeto/IP-Echelon. ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Proper bandwidth units [was: Exit nodes on Gandi]
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 13:33:05 +, grarpamp wrote: > >> People, can we please mind using the proper units. > > > > How is 'bytes' improper when that is the basic transfer unit of TCP/IP, > > and half of the underlying protocols? The only ones who really don't > > care about bytes are the layer 1 guys. > > No, routing the global internet occurs at layer 3. Yes, and the global internet uses IP packets whose length is measured in bytes, not bits. ... > Correct, in the sense, unless aggregated across many users, > they are non-constant incidental end user applications, > not a part of the real network itself. This is the only actual argument why we should adopt bits/s instead of byte/s, yet... ... > And as the internet continues growing to support constant > HD video streams down to every curb and datacenter port, > those old style Bytes/caps become doubly irrelevant. > It's bits per second now, just like hardware routers do it. No, that's still bogus. The only reason the hardware guys talked about bits/s was that that was the physical line limit, and that there was no consensus about protocols, or how many bits shall constitute a byte, or how many extra bits shall accompagny(sp?) the actual data. Nowadays bytes always have eight bits, it's always IP, and the transport is (almost) always fully efficient so that a byte/s always translates into eight bits/s. There is simply no more reason to talk in bits/s at all, except that everyone is doing it. (The fractional reason that you can deduce the needed physical bandwith from the bitrate is also long gone.) And for me it's pretty irrelevant whether I need to break down the TB/month my VPS provider gives me into bits/s or bytes/s. Neither is as straightforward as a decimal shift. Andreas -- "Totally trivial. Famous last words." From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800 ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Proper bandwidth units [was: Exit nodes on Gandi]
>> People, can we please mind using the proper units. > > How is 'bytes' improper when that is the basic transfer unit of TCP/IP, > and half of the underlying protocols? The only ones who really don't > care about bytes are the layer 1 guys. No, routing the global internet occurs at layer 3. Bandwidth is a commodity, bought and sold on the open market in units of 'bits per second', from the Tier-1's all the way down to your ISP/hoster. All of them use routing and switching hardware from Juniper, Huawei, etc that is configured in 'bits per second'. When you go to provision a continuous big bandwidth service such as Tor, bittorrent, streaming, etc, you ultimately do that in 'bits per second'. Especially for large bitrates, multiple megabits and up. Any 'Bytes' shown to you by the provider are simply an abstraction from the real 'bits' they use internally (and of particular importance at their billing points with peers [1]). Bytes are a translated kludge meant to match the 'Bytes' seen in end user incidental application logs, which traditionally moved data you owned and managed off disk. People who sell bandwidth in quantity will look at you like you're speaking some foreign language when you come to them wanting to push '30TiB/mo' instead of 100Mbps. They want to know (how much CAR on) what port you're going to fill up 24x7x365 so they can buy and bill appropriately. That's done in DS-x, T-x, OC-x, 10/100/1000/1... all bits, not Bytes. Your dialup, cable, dsl, and fiber lines are all in bits/sec too [2]. Why in the world should you have to sit there with a calculator to figure out how you want to fit Tor within that. [1] You know, the series of tubes. [2] Excepting any silly transfer caps, that you then have to decide to eat up all at once at a high (or maximum) line rate or slowly over time. Which, with constant applications you don't care about, becomes... guess what... a simple bps number all over again! You should have used bps from the start in that case. >> I know Tor doesn't make it easy because Tor itself incorrectly >> uses Bytes. But Tor is a network application, and real network >> apps are measured in 'bits per second', > > So, neither scp nor wget are real network applications? Nor ftp, nor firefox? Correct, in the sense, unless aggregated across many users, they are non-constant incidental end user applications, not a part of the real network itself. > Tor is an overlay application just like bittorrent Yes. Tor, I2P, torrent/sharing, vpn, overlay nets, software routers, etc are all network bandwidth services, usually provisioned in the sense/mindset that they will fill their entire provisioned/intended bitrate and that one best make plans/headroom/commitment/tolerance for just that case. When you go to drop relays on the net, or even get a job on the net, in reality you're going to be speaking in 'bits per second'. Everything else 'Bytes' is just a hack made for the traditional web/ftp people and their logs. Bandwidth providers and what amount to transit services are not really in a position to optimize and thus don't care about that sort of logs, they just tack up a bitrate, pay the same bill every month and forget about it. > Is there anything nowadays that does move data on networks > in finer grain than bytes? It's not about 'fineness', it's about interop at levels at which counting and optimizing Bytes is irrelevant. Yes, thankfully some things like Vuze, Tor head, some OS packet filters, software routers, and such can be configured in bits/sec. And as the internet continues growing to support constant HD video streams down to every curb and datacenter port, those old style Bytes/caps become doubly irrelevant. It's bits per second now, just like hardware routers do it. ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Proper bandwidth units [was: Exit nodes on Gandi]
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:14:15 +, grarpamp wrote: ... > People, can we please mind using the proper units. How is 'bytes' improper when that is the basic transfer unit of TCP/IP, and half of the underlying protocols? The only ones who really don't care about bytes are the layer 1 guys. > I know Tor doesn't make it easy because Tor itself incorrectly > uses Bytes. But Tor is a network application, and real network > apps are measured in 'bits per second', So, neither scp nor wget are real network applications? Nor ftp, nor firefox? Andreas -- "Totally trivial. Famous last words." From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800 ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Proper bandwidth units [was: Exit nodes on Gandi]
On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:26:32 +, Roger Dingledine wrote: ... > I understand your perspective, but Tor is an overlay application just > like bittorrent. Tor moves bytes around. It happens that it moves the > bytes over the network, Is there anything nowadays that does move data on networks in finer grain than bytes? Andreas -- "Totally trivial. Famous last words." From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800 ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
