[tor-relays] Determining geographical locations for a new exit relay would help most
I'm standing up a new exit relay on the VULTR network. How would a person go about determining which location is in most need of additional exit relay capacity? Available locations: https://www.vultr.com/locations/ * Miami, Florida * Chicago, Illinois * New York / New Jersey * Dallas, Texas * Seattle, Washington * Atlanta, Georgia * Los Angeles, California * Silicon Valley, California * (AU) Sydney, Australia * (Asia) Tokyo, Japan * (EU) Amsterdam, NL * (EU) London, UK * (EU) Paris, France * (EU) Frankfurt, DE Also, curious to hear people's thoughts on any potential jurisdictional arbitrage benefits to be gleaned by choosing a location other than ones country of residence or citizenship. For the sake of argument, consider a VULTR account opened by U.S. citizen residing in the U.S. Choopa LLC (VULTR parent company) is also a US based company. http://start.cortera.com/company/research/k5o8lvm2j/choopa-llc/ ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Determining geographical locations for a new exit relay would help most
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi Seth, I'm standing up a new exit relay on the VULTR network. How would a person go about determining which location is in most need of additional exit relay capacity? thanks for taking network diversity into account when setting up new relays! It might be oversimplified but using compass with group by country ordered by consensus weight (or in your case exit probability) shows you where most of tor network capacity is currently located. The goal is to setup relays in new or rarely used locations. So by using compass your list would look like this, ordered from better to less good: * (AU) Sydney, Australia (0.01% CW) * (Asia) Tokyo, Japan (0.8% CW) * UK (4.6% CW) * US (10.1%) * NL (12.4% CW) * France (21.6%) * DE (25.7% CW) Note: the is a current snapshot and numbers change but AU or JP is better then DE (from a capacity divers. point of view) - this will also be the case in a week or a month. You might also want to consider the exit probability and use that in addition or instead of CW. I don't know if VULTR has multiple ASes but if they do you might also want to have a look at the group by AS results (if they allow you to choose). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVQ7F5AAoJEFv7XvVCELh052cP/j/ezacutRehF8V+G+JrsIkC a1v+yd8Equ8qGrbXM0r1ZccpOAPWphmV17jvhrDtOG/qDmC9thw6PITtOxhMgbk8 eZhzEJWBqaWGPuFhcqm3sJnFuDZ0mTqm4JeXRaGycDy5GhqQw0id6MoUc0NKI1if WkrFfSPwqTjEt3NIjE+fRaqbVguyTQpguoTYkePDobgOlNLUQa2hy/z3mYWNN2eS HxNGdnURVjSZep/TKRgsEht/+XdfPQKgKKwWOp3siXG6TS9wYwkIPobhXG931CGT qq0GpoZBp8b1UcYG2UL/DWUh3P9j2A9O+DwoP4IuE0I7XWyX7xnJQs+BcwvOassd Rrr2ELWq6TCnyyTN/QN4rXZ5ol+M8Bz3ILeTtCuHnzgUlWKzcqvYCgVa2E2trxh0 TpwIYKuKVNbLMab43TD3xcEBVcDM250T8UeJ5mNdRfzFupLhVH2eSN9Xk9iNaQYx Fmq8E6JXsTbAABkIfxYaR07FlDQcGrnZMsrgfIxoSqdZCbODYBLW1gfPJWjmtzaT pGChAZ71QzJ6CYGVbQjVTwvEnHZDnsVagnsbiEn7Bjq93h4rgQZuGqlzc+9tM+bK IC5Fs+X5/l17IxnPLPeYtoJOjgIq877eeycQVVxZrQHtG3+g2I0YCZYQU8hKk9sZ juC+W2Qd7XfOnHlSH5k7 =Hq2a -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Determining geographical locations for a new exit relay would help most
On Fri, 01 May 2015 10:01:45 -0700, nusenu nus...@openmailbox.org wrote: It might be oversimplified but using compass with group by country ordered by consensus weight (or in your case exit probability) shows you where most of tor network capacity is currently located. The goal is to setup relays in new or rarely used locations. So by using compass your list would look like this, ordered from better to less good: * (AU) Sydney, Australia (0.01% CW) * (Asia) Tokyo, Japan (0.8% CW) * UK (4.6% CW) * US (10.1%) * NL (12.4% CW) * France (21.6%) * DE (25.7% CW) Note: the is a current snapshot and numbers change but AU or JP is better then DE (from a capacity divers. point of view) - this will also be the case in a week or a month. You might also want to consider the exit probability and use that in addition or instead of CW. I don't know if VULTR has multiple ASes but if they do you might also want to have a look at the group by AS results (if they allow you to choose). Thanks for the breakdown, that helps. The only hitch with the Sydney and Toyko locations is that instead of 1000GB/mo of bandwidth, you only get 200GB/mo. Would it be better (all things considered) to go with the UK location at 1000GB/mo vs Tokyo or Sydney at 200GB/mo? ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
