Re: [tor-relays] how to distribute pgp public key?

[Jason Odoom]

On Dec 7, 2016 1:28 AM, "Univibe"  wrote:

If I want to include a reference to my public PGP key on Atlas using the
ContactInfo field on my relays, what's the best way to do it? Should I
upload my key to some of the public keyservers and then list the
fingerprint on Atlas?


Yes. I use the MIT Keyserver at http://pgp.mit.edu

If so which keyservers are recommended?

I had a thought to publish it on my relay's DirPort (using DirPortFrontPage
and a simple html doc containing the public key). Then I could just provide
a link to the DirPort in ContactInfo.


It's better to just use a fingerprint. I don't know how efficient or useful
that would be. It is also not necessary.


Is there a better way to do this?

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

[tor-relays] how to distribute pgp public key?

[Univibe]

If I want to include a reference to my public PGP key on Atlas using the 
ContactInfo field on my relays, what's the best way to do it? Should I upload 
my key to some of the public keyservers and then list the fingerprint on Atlas? 
If so which keyservers are recommended?

I had a thought to publish it on my relay's DirPort (using DirPortFrontPage and 
a simple html doc containing the public key). Then I could just provide a link 
to the DirPort in ContactInfo.

Is there a better way to do this?___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

[Rana]

I can just imagine someone panting while dragging a sub-$35 old desktop 
computer up the stairs after physically searching for it in a nearby junkyard. 
A considerable level of destitution and a commendable commitment to the cause 
of Tor  would be required.
 
-Original Message-
From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf Of 
Roman Mamedov
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 7:08 AM
To: Duncan Guthrie
Cc: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 00:36:15 +
Duncan Guthrie  wrote:

> My original figure may have been... somewhat off. With different 
> models they may have updated the network hardware.

They did not. All models with Ethernet use the same SMSC LAN9514 chip.

> A more general point is that old desktop computers still offer better 
> performance than a Raspberry Pi. You can easily get one for 
> considerably less than the cost of a Pi

And pay more than the cost of a Pi in electricity.

--
With respect,
Roman
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Circuits from Tor relay?

[Rana]

That's a thorough and useful answer. Thank you Tim.

-Original Message-
From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf Of 
teor
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 12:12 AM
To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Circuits from Tor relay?


> On 7 Dec. 2016, at 08:07, Rana  wrote:
> 
> Arm reports that my relay has 15 circuits connected to my (middle only) 
> relay. Some of the circuits have one middle relay and some of them have two. 
> All the circuits are FROM my relay to exit nodes, and all have the same guard 
> (first) relay.

Your relay is testing whether its ORPort and DirPort are reachable from the 
internet. To do this, it uses a Tor Exit circuit to connect to the DirPort, and 
uses a Tor internal circuit to connect to the ORPort.
 
> My relay has a small number of inbound connections and a minuscule number of 
> outbound connections (it is a very new relay as I wiped out and restarted my 
> old one a day and a half ago). Most of the inbound connections are from 
> DurAuths.

The Directory Authorities are testing whether your relay is reachable from 
their IP address. To do this, they connect directly to the ORPort.

Also, the Bandwidth Authorities are testing what amount of traffic your relay 
can handle. They uses a Tor Exit circuit that goes via your relay and an Exit.

> What are all these circuits??? Why would a middle relay build full circuits 
> to exit nodes?

Like Tor clients, your relay also builds various circuits preemptively, in case 
it needs them later.

If you want more specific help, please provide the following information to the 
list:

What do the logs on your relay say?

What is your relay's fingerprint?
(Your relay is publicly listed in the tor consensus. If you want to keep the 
details private, run a bridge relay.)

T

--
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org




___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

[Roman Mamedov]

On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 00:36:15 +
Duncan Guthrie  wrote:

> My original figure may have been... somewhat off. With different models 
> they may have updated the network hardware.

They did not. All models with Ethernet use the same SMSC LAN9514 chip.

> A more general point is that old desktop computers still offer better 
> performance than a Raspberry Pi. You can easily get one for considerably 
> less than the cost of a Pi

And pay more than the cost of a Pi in electricity.

-- 
With respect,
Roman
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Call for Tor Fallback Directories

[teor]

> On 7 Dec. 2016, at 11:38, Tobias Sachs  wrote:
> 
> Hey teor,
> 
> my relay 5665A3904C89E22E971305EE8C1997BCA4123C69 is according to your log 
> [4] black and whitelisted. But it is only in the whitelist from you [1]
> My second relay B567E8E39641F61091C1F2CAAAF73D3D1BF9CFE1 is according to [4] 
> blacklisted but also not in [2].
> 
> I hope you can clarify this out.
> 
> Best Regards
> Tobias

Hi Tobias,

Sorry about the confusion.

I tried to skip relay operators who had responded already.
So I temporarily added all the whitelist to the blacklist.
This makes it look like lots of relays are in the blacklist,
when they are really in the whitelist.

5665A3904C89E22E971305EE8C1997BCA4123C69 is in the whitelist:
https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.whitelist

5665A3904C89E22E971305EE8C1997BCA4123C69 and
B567E8E39641F61091C1F2CAAAF73D3D1BF9CFE1 are not in the blacklist:
https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.blacklist

Do you want me to add B567E8E39641F61091C1F2CAAAF73D3D1BF9CFE1 to
the whitelist?
Will it have the same IP and key for the next 2 years?

Also, I tried replying to your direct email, but your mail server was down:

Technical details of temporary failure: 
The recipient server did not accept our requests to connect. Learn more at 
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/7720 
[mail.germancraft.net. 2a00:f826:8:1::135: timed out]
[mail.germancraft.net. 31.47.238.135: generic::failed_precondition: connect 
error (0): error]

Tim

> Am 04.12.2016 um 11:44 schrieb teor:
>> ...
>> 
>> We are keeping the fallback lists from the last release[1][2].
>> 
>> ...
>> 
>> The latest list[3] and log[4] of candidates was generated using the
>> instructions in [5] from scripts/maint/updateFallbackDirs.py on my
>> GitHub branch[6]. (This branch has some bug fixes compared to what's in
>> master.) We're tracking this work in [7].
>> 
>> [0]: 
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/FallbackDirectoryMirrors
>> [1]: 
>> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.whitelist
>> [2]: 
>> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.blacklist
>> [3]: 
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/18828/potential_extra_fallbacks_2016-12-04
>> [4]: 
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/18828/potential_extra_fallbacks_2016-12-04.log
>> [5]: 
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/UpdatingFallbackDirectoryMirrors
>> [6]: 
>> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/updateFallbackDirs.py
>> [7]: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18828
>> 
>> T
>> 
> >
> > ___
> > tor-relays mailing list
> > 
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> 
> > 
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
> 
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

T

-- 
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org




___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Call for Tor Fallback Directories

[Tobias Sachs]

Hey teor,

my relay 5665A3904C89E22E971305EE8C1997BCA4123C69 is according to your log [4] 
black and whitelisted. But it is only in the whitelist from you [1]
My second relay B567E8E39641F61091C1F2CAAAF73D3D1BF9CFE1 is according to [4] 
blacklisted but also not in [2].

I hope you can clarify this out.

Best Regards
Tobias



Am 04.12.2016 um 11:44 schrieb teor:
> Dear Tor Relay Operator,
>
> Your relay(s) can help tor clients find the tor network by becoming a
> fallback directory mirror.[0]
>
> These mirrors are hard-coded into tor's source code, like the directory
> authorities. We have 80 fallbacks, but we want 200 for the next release.
>
> Fallbacks need to have:
> - the same IP address(es) and ports for the next 2 years,
> - the same relay identity key for the next 2 years,
> - good uptime (at least 95%), and
> - good bandwidth and network connectivity
>   (we estimate an extra 25GB per month).
>
> Please email me to add your relays that fit these criteria to the list.
> If you are BCC'd on this email, it looks like you have at least one
> relay that could become a fallback.
> You can also email me if you know your relay will be changing address
> or key, and I'll make sure we don't choose it.
>
> We are keeping the fallback lists from the last release[1][2].
>
> So if you have emailed me before about becoming a fallback, there is no
> need to email again. But please let me know if your relay details have
> changed.  (I did not BCC relay operators who are already on the fallback
> lists, unless their relay details changed.)
>
> In a week or two, I will run a script to select the hard-coded list for
> the release.
>
> If you're interested, here's some background to this request:
>
> The latest list[3] and log[4] of candidates was generated using the
> instructions in [5] from scripts/maint/updateFallbackDirs.py on my
> GitHub branch[6]. (This branch has some bug fixes compared to what's in
> master.) We're tracking this work in [7].
>
> [0]:
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/FallbackDirectoryMirrors
> [1]:
> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.whitelist
> [2]:
> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.blacklist
> [3]:
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/18828/potential_extra_fallbacks_2016-12-04
> [4]:
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/18828/potential_extra_fallbacks_2016-12-04.log
> [5]:
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/UpdatingFallbackDirectoryMirrors
> [6]:
> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/updateFallbackDirs.py
> [7]: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18828
>
> T
>
> > ___ > tor-relays mailing
list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org >
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

[Duncan Guthrie]

On 06/12/16 21:10, SuperSluether wrote:
I don't know the actual numbers for the Raspberry Pi 1, I was just 
quoting from Duncan: 
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2016-December/011182.html


I was told this figure by a friend who tried networking "stuff" on a Pi. 
From personal experience also, I have found they are just a bit rubbish, 
other than for using a probe for OONI, and for a short time using it to 
try out NetBSD and various other operating systems.


My original figure may have been... somewhat off. With different models 
they may have updated the network hardware. Certainly on the new ones 
they are better, but there are deeper flaws with the Raspberry Pi's 
hardware, e.g. the omnipotent GPU blob and various other proprietary 
parts that make supporting it non-trivial compared to say, the 
BeagleBone Black.


A more general point is that old desktop computers still offer better 
performance than a Raspberry Pi. You can easily get one for considerably 
less than the cost of a Pi, and there are also issues of network 
diversity with the Raspberry Pi - if some flaw was exploited in the 
various nasty proprietary bits that make up the Pi, much of the network 
might be compromised - due to large similarities across the different 
models, this would affect considerable numbers of devices. So using many 
different computer models with a large variety of operating systems is 
ideal for the network as a whole.


Duncan
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Call for Tor Fallback Directories

[teor]

> On 7 Dec. 2016, at 11:04, l3thal.inject...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> Hey Tim,
> 
> I believe my relay may already be on the fallback list. If not, please
> feel free to include it. It has been up, fast and stable for well over
> 2 years and will up for the indefinite future at this time.

Thanks, I added your relay to the whitelist.

TorWeatherHelper - 0F100F60C7A63BED90216052324D29B08CFCF797

I'll run the script later in December that generates a list of relays for the 
release.

Tim

> 
> Thanks
> 
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 5:44 AM, teor  wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA512
>> 
>> Dear Tor Relay Operator,
>> 
>> Your relay(s) can help tor clients find the tor network by becoming a
>> fallback directory mirror.[0]
>> 
>> These mirrors are hard-coded into tor's source code, like the directory
>> authorities. We have 80 fallbacks, but we want 200 for the next release.
>> 
>> Fallbacks need to have:
>> - - the same IP address(es) and ports for the next 2 years,
>> - - the same relay identity key for the next 2 years,
>> - - good uptime (at least 95%), and
>> - - good bandwidth and network connectivity
>>  (we estimate an extra 25GB per month).
>> 
>> Please email me to add your relays that fit these criteria to the list.
>> If you are BCC'd on this email, it looks like you have at least one
>> relay that could become a fallback.
>> You can also email me if you know your relay will be changing address
>> or key, and I'll make sure we don't choose it.
>> 
>> We are keeping the fallback lists from the last release[1][2].
>> 
>> So if you have emailed me before about becoming a fallback, there is no
>> need to email again. But please let me know if your relay details have
>> changed.  (I did not BCC relay operators who are already on the fallback
>> lists, unless their relay details changed.)
>> 
>> In a week or two, I will run a script to select the hard-coded list for
>> the release.
>> 
>> If you're interested, here's some background to this request:
>> 
>> The latest list[3] and log[4] of candidates was generated using the
>> instructions in [5] from scripts/maint/updateFallbackDirs.py on my
>> GitHub branch[6]. (This branch has some bug fixes compared to what's in
>> master.) We're tracking this work in [7].
>> 
>> [0]: 
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/FallbackDirectoryMirrors
>> [1]: 
>> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.whitelist
>> [2]: 
>> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.blacklist
>> [3]: 
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/18828/potential_extra_fallbacks_2016-12-04
>> [4]: 
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/18828/potential_extra_fallbacks_2016-12-04.log
>> [5]: 
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/UpdatingFallbackDirectoryMirrors
>> [6]: 
>> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/updateFallbackDirs.py
>> [7]: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18828
>> 
>> T
>> 
>> - --
>> Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)
>> 
>> teor2345 at gmail dot com
>> PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
>> ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
>> xmpp: teor at torproject dot org
>> - 
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
>> 
>> iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYQ+laAAoJEEUMun+WjwlLXd8QAMVKWrGW+N5ij5/1k1AEDQpC
>> qMK3C3stukeuHYqLEU3GnhJFU/CWMp+iThRNueC5I96MEpcioJDQaCDK6aGEvTY3
>> efPnYwOJcgE7v4up+JSFWUlO4HcF5Fu5cSVl710JjRiHuZAyLOQw0rWEMzfp0OQp
>> sZLgijbtCUCcels7IS+bE89y4KKQvLu5lz+H7cPIcsx4TJ4QHd5LbWuvtNIHE2lW
>> zA3LlrYsO4vtrFs/0kBWku1u7l1ZhD0Un/lwY7JWaxGmwm9C6kJDFwBFCGYRlakF
>> VLfsoVSgcdjQPkZV9jeL0X+9Wn9L6zZ5JNhM5lhYYpGVD+Rl/apPfhxHI5aOTsGe
>> WRcDjxvgUdMD//xnk2XTmnzKCNUNMyUKGSL8Y7Fadp7+dLLkWlovEp6iOnyAffh1
>> ZnrV7dhRgH3NcgACDpQ2rAqVzUnhdn1//bcD1MlXjObxvZD1Io1zp7CDQHnG6IaG
>> ydc+3qoqUoII0JQFxrRCFi2cH/E8+3x0+7fC0g91irdGG+Pcosf7IFPJvFsdilCg
>> rN4n6Ohmm1L3KQVWLG7TcvEAcjIeyMurhCvK042Q/X7HYenVS3wVxawd8dnb/rOl
>> 0ItMUsXBKgLVcZXhzUTOB+pNaX8aFj1sJnCB2LRDT8s8a2+zESufNxjgGYZ3Nduk
>> FziDqhHJs7MXyX0HPJPH
>> =omox
>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>> 
>> ___
>> tor-relays mailing list
>> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Good code is like a good joke - it needs no explanation.
> -- Russ Olsen
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

T

-- 
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org




___

Re: [tor-relays] Call for Tor Fallback Directories

[l3thal . injecti0n]

Hey Tim,

I believe my relay may already be on the fallback list. If not, please
feel free to include it. It has been up, fast and stable for well over
2 years and will up for the indefinite future at this time.

Thanks

On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 5:44 AM, teor  wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Dear Tor Relay Operator,
>
> Your relay(s) can help tor clients find the tor network by becoming a
> fallback directory mirror.[0]
>
> These mirrors are hard-coded into tor's source code, like the directory
> authorities. We have 80 fallbacks, but we want 200 for the next release.
>
> Fallbacks need to have:
> - - the same IP address(es) and ports for the next 2 years,
> - - the same relay identity key for the next 2 years,
> - - good uptime (at least 95%), and
> - - good bandwidth and network connectivity
>   (we estimate an extra 25GB per month).
>
> Please email me to add your relays that fit these criteria to the list.
> If you are BCC'd on this email, it looks like you have at least one
> relay that could become a fallback.
> You can also email me if you know your relay will be changing address
> or key, and I'll make sure we don't choose it.
>
> We are keeping the fallback lists from the last release[1][2].
>
> So if you have emailed me before about becoming a fallback, there is no
> need to email again. But please let me know if your relay details have
> changed.  (I did not BCC relay operators who are already on the fallback
> lists, unless their relay details changed.)
>
> In a week or two, I will run a script to select the hard-coded list for
> the release.
>
> If you're interested, here's some background to this request:
>
> The latest list[3] and log[4] of candidates was generated using the
> instructions in [5] from scripts/maint/updateFallbackDirs.py on my
> GitHub branch[6]. (This branch has some bug fixes compared to what's in
> master.) We're tracking this work in [7].
>
> [0]: 
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/FallbackDirectoryMirrors
> [1]: 
> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.whitelist
> [2]: 
> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/fallback.blacklist
> [3]: 
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/18828/potential_extra_fallbacks_2016-12-04
> [4]: 
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/18828/potential_extra_fallbacks_2016-12-04.log
> [5]: 
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/UpdatingFallbackDirectoryMirrors
> [6]: 
> https://github.com/teor2345/tor/blob/fallbacks-029-v2/scripts/maint/updateFallbackDirs.py
> [7]: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18828
>
> T
>
> - --
> Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)
>
> teor2345 at gmail dot com
> PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
> ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
> xmpp: teor at torproject dot org
> - 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
>
> iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYQ+laAAoJEEUMun+WjwlLXd8QAMVKWrGW+N5ij5/1k1AEDQpC
> qMK3C3stukeuHYqLEU3GnhJFU/CWMp+iThRNueC5I96MEpcioJDQaCDK6aGEvTY3
> efPnYwOJcgE7v4up+JSFWUlO4HcF5Fu5cSVl710JjRiHuZAyLOQw0rWEMzfp0OQp
> sZLgijbtCUCcels7IS+bE89y4KKQvLu5lz+H7cPIcsx4TJ4QHd5LbWuvtNIHE2lW
> zA3LlrYsO4vtrFs/0kBWku1u7l1ZhD0Un/lwY7JWaxGmwm9C6kJDFwBFCGYRlakF
> VLfsoVSgcdjQPkZV9jeL0X+9Wn9L6zZ5JNhM5lhYYpGVD+Rl/apPfhxHI5aOTsGe
> WRcDjxvgUdMD//xnk2XTmnzKCNUNMyUKGSL8Y7Fadp7+dLLkWlovEp6iOnyAffh1
> ZnrV7dhRgH3NcgACDpQ2rAqVzUnhdn1//bcD1MlXjObxvZD1Io1zp7CDQHnG6IaG
> ydc+3qoqUoII0JQFxrRCFi2cH/E8+3x0+7fC0g91irdGG+Pcosf7IFPJvFsdilCg
> rN4n6Ohmm1L3KQVWLG7TcvEAcjIeyMurhCvK042Q/X7HYenVS3wVxawd8dnb/rOl
> 0ItMUsXBKgLVcZXhzUTOB+pNaX8aFj1sJnCB2LRDT8s8a2+zESufNxjgGYZ3Nduk
> FziDqhHJs7MXyX0HPJPH
> =omox
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays



-- 
Good code is like a good joke - it needs no explanation.
-- Russ Olsen
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Circuits from Tor relay?

[teor]

> On 7 Dec. 2016, at 08:07, Rana  wrote:
> 
> Arm reports that my relay has 15 circuits connected to my (middle only) 
> relay. Some of the circuits have one middle relay and some of them have two. 
> All the circuits are FROM my relay to exit nodes, and all have the same guard 
> (first) relay.

Your relay is testing whether its ORPort and DirPort are reachable from
the internet. To do this, it uses a Tor Exit circuit to connect to the
DirPort, and uses a Tor internal circuit to connect to the ORPort.
 
> My relay has a small number of inbound connections and a minuscule number of 
> outbound connections (it is a very new relay as I wiped out and restarted my 
> old one a day and a half ago). Most of the inbound connections are from 
> DurAuths.

The Directory Authorities are testing whether your relay is reachable
from their IP address. To do this, they connect directly to the ORPort.

Also, the Bandwidth Authorities are testing what amount of traffic your
relay can handle. They uses a Tor Exit circuit that goes via your relay
and an Exit.

> What are all these circuits??? Why would a middle relay build full circuits 
> to exit nodes?

Like Tor clients, your relay also builds various circuits preemptively,
in case it needs them later.

If you want more specific help, please provide the following
information to the list:

What do the logs on your relay say?

What is your relay's fingerprint?
(Your relay is publicly listed in the tor consensus. If you want to
keep the details private, run a bridge relay.)

T

-- 
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org




___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

[Roman Mamedov]

On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 22:00:20 +0100
diffusae  wrote:

> Well, I can read and also now the translation from Bits to Bytes.
> But I am not sure about your value of the maximum network capacity.
> 
> That's the iperf3 measurement of a Raspberry Pi 1 Model B+:
> 
> [ ID] Interval   Transfer Bandwidth   Retr
> [  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  83.6 MBytes  8.36 MBytes/sec  141
> sender
> [  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  83.1 MBytes  8.31 MBytes/sec
> receiver

It's no problem to push close to 100 Mbit on any Raspberry Pi with just plain
iperf. 

[ ID] Interval   Transfer Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec   111 MBytes  93.1 Mbits/sec

Tor is entirely another story though, with all its encryption/decryption and
the need to keep track of a few thousands of connections at the same time. I
suppose the "1 MB/sec" figure mentioned was about Tor specifically.

-- 
With respect,
Roman
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

[diffusae]

Ahh, ok. It looks like, that should be a bit more that 1 MB/s.

Regards,

On 06.12.2016 22:10, SuperSluether wrote:
> I don't know the actual numbers for the Raspberry Pi 1, I was just
> quoting from Duncan:
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2016-December/011182.html
> 
> 
> On 12/06/2016 03:00 PM, diffusae wrote:
>> Well, I can read and also now the translation from Bits to Bytes.
>> But I am not sure about your value of the maximum network capacity.
>>
>> That's the iperf3 measurement of a Raspberry Pi 1 Model B+:
>>
>> [ ID] Interval   Transfer Bandwidth   Retr
>> [  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  83.6 MBytes  8.36 MBytes/sec  141
>> sender
>> [  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  83.1 MBytes  8.31 MBytes/sec
>> receiver
>>
>> Also arm shows me an average of 9 MB/s.
>>
>> Maybe they have change the USB LAN chip?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On 06.12.2016 19:20, Tristan wrote:
>>> Again, bits or bytes. I can't believe I'm repeating myself, don't you
>>> people read?
>>>
>>> The ORIGINAL (version 1) Raspberry Pi had a max of 1 MegaBYTE.
>>>
>>> 1 MegaBYTE = 8 megaBITS
>>>
>>> Obviously other factors limit performance, but looking at just the
>>> maximum network capacity of a Raspberry Pi 1, it could handle 8Mbit/s.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 6, 2016 11:16 AM, "Rana" >> > wrote:
>>>
>>>  -Original Message-
>>>  From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org
>>>  ] On Behalf Of
>>> pa011
>>>  Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 1:24 AM
>>>  To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>>>  
>>>  Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with
>>>  dynamic IP
>>>
>>>
>>>  > I would like to hear about ONE Raspi Tor operator who was allowed
>>>  by DirAuths (or bwauths or whatever)  to come even near 1 mbit/s
>>>  bandwidth utilization
>>>  >
>>>
>>>  let me tell:
>>> 
>>> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/AA44C4BE3C90DCAAC09E5CD26150710AAA80D58B
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> 
>>> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/CA9A5D5C4688F04EEC1AF810B0FD348109FA17FB
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>  are sharing the same dynamic IP on a Rasp2 -cut every 24 hours
>>>
>>>   day rx  | tx  |total|  
>>> avg. rate
>>>  
>>> +-+-+---
>>>   05.12.201627,20 GiB |   28,39 GiB |   55,59 GiB |5,40
>>>  Mbit/s
>>>
>>>
>>>  that is slight above 1 Mbit/s  :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>  Best regards
>>>
>>>  Paul
>>>  
>>>
>>>  Wow nice bandwidth you are pushing through Paul! You mean two Raspi
>>>  2's sharing an Internet connection, each relaying 27 Gbytes per day
>>>  at 5.4 Mbit/s on the average?? Total 10.8 Mbit/s?? Or 2.7 Mbit/s
>>> each?
>>>
>>>  Definitely refutes the previously claimed 1 Mbit/s Tor limit on
>>>  Raspi, and means that Raspi has nothing to do with the ridiculously
>>>  low utilization of my relay, just as I thought. As a matter of fact
>>>  this means that whoever is NOT running a relay on a Raspi  (or two,
>>>  or four of them) is wasting money, unless he has a computer lying
>>>  about with nothing better to do.
>>>
>>>  Also, what's the max memory and CPU utilization on your Raspi (I
>>>  have read somewhere that Tor is only capable of utilizing 2 of
>>> the 4
>>>  CPU cores), and what kind of Internet connection do you have?
>>>
>>>   BTW the $35 Raspi 3 has 33% more CPU power than your Raspi 2 and
>>>  the same amount of memory.
>>>
>>>  Rana
>>>
>>>  ___
>>>  tor-relays mailing list
>>>  tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>>> 
>>>  https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>>>  
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> tor-relays mailing list
>>> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>>>
>> ___
>> tor-relays mailing list
>> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

[SuperSluether]

I don't know the actual numbers for the Raspberry Pi 1, I was just 
quoting from Duncan: 
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2016-December/011182.html



On 12/06/2016 03:00 PM, diffusae wrote:

Well, I can read and also now the translation from Bits to Bytes.
But I am not sure about your value of the maximum network capacity.

That's the iperf3 measurement of a Raspberry Pi 1 Model B+:

[ ID] Interval   Transfer Bandwidth   Retr
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  83.6 MBytes  8.36 MBytes/sec  141
sender
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  83.1 MBytes  8.31 MBytes/sec
receiver

Also arm shows me an average of 9 MB/s.

Maybe they have change the USB LAN chip?

Regards,

On 06.12.2016 19:20, Tristan wrote:

Again, bits or bytes. I can't believe I'm repeating myself, don't you
people read?

The ORIGINAL (version 1) Raspberry Pi had a max of 1 MegaBYTE.

1 MegaBYTE = 8 megaBITS

Obviously other factors limit performance, but looking at just the
maximum network capacity of a Raspberry Pi 1, it could handle 8Mbit/s.


On Dec 6, 2016 11:16 AM, "Rana" > wrote:

 -Original Message-
 From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org
 ] On Behalf Of pa011
 Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 1:24 AM
 To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
 
 Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with
 dynamic IP


 > I would like to hear about ONE Raspi Tor operator who was allowed
 by DirAuths (or bwauths or whatever)  to come even near 1 mbit/s
 bandwidth utilization
 >

 let me tell:
 
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/AA44C4BE3C90DCAAC09E5CD26150710AAA80D58B
 

 
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/CA9A5D5C4688F04EEC1AF810B0FD348109FA17FB
 


 are sharing the same dynamic IP on a Rasp2 -cut every 24 hours

  day rx  | tx  |total|   avg. rate

  +-+-+---

  05.12.201627,20 GiB |   28,39 GiB |   55,59 GiB |5,40
 Mbit/s


 that is slight above 1 Mbit/s  :-)


 Best regards

 Paul
 

 Wow nice bandwidth you are pushing through Paul! You mean two Raspi
 2's sharing an Internet connection, each relaying 27 Gbytes per day
 at 5.4 Mbit/s on the average?? Total 10.8 Mbit/s?? Or 2.7 Mbit/s each?

 Definitely refutes the previously claimed 1 Mbit/s Tor limit on
 Raspi, and means that Raspi has nothing to do with the ridiculously
 low utilization of my relay, just as I thought. As a matter of fact
 this means that whoever is NOT running a relay on a Raspi  (or two,
 or four of them) is wasting money, unless he has a computer lying
 about with nothing better to do.

 Also, what's the max memory and CPU utilization on your Raspi (I
 have read somewhere that Tor is only capable of utilizing 2 of the 4
 CPU cores), and what kind of Internet connection do you have?

  BTW the $35 Raspi 3 has 33% more CPU power than your Raspi 2 and
 the same amount of memory.

 Rana

 ___
 tor-relays mailing list
 tor-relays@lists.torproject.org 
 https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
 




___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

[tor-relays] Circuits from Tor relay?

[Rana]

Arm reports that my relay has 15 circuits connected to my (middle only)
relay. Some of the circuits have one middle relay and some of them have two.
All the circuits are FROM my relay to exit nodes, and all have the same
guard (first) relay.
 
My relay has a small number of inbound connections and a minuscule number of
outbound connections (it is a very new relay as I wiped out and restarted my
old one a day and a half ago). Most of the inbound connections are from
DurAuths.
 
What are all these circuits??? Why would a middle relay build full circuits
to exit nodes?
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

[diffusae]

Well, I can read and also now the translation from Bits to Bytes.
But I am not sure about your value of the maximum network capacity.

That's the iperf3 measurement of a Raspberry Pi 1 Model B+:

[ ID] Interval   Transfer Bandwidth   Retr
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  83.6 MBytes  8.36 MBytes/sec  141
sender
[  4]   0.00-10.00  sec  83.1 MBytes  8.31 MBytes/sec
receiver

Also arm shows me an average of 9 MB/s.

Maybe they have change the USB LAN chip?

Regards,

On 06.12.2016 19:20, Tristan wrote:
> Again, bits or bytes. I can't believe I'm repeating myself, don't you
> people read? 
> 
> The ORIGINAL (version 1) Raspberry Pi had a max of 1 MegaBYTE.
> 
> 1 MegaBYTE = 8 megaBITS
> 
> Obviously other factors limit performance, but looking at just the
> maximum network capacity of a Raspberry Pi 1, it could handle 8Mbit/s. 
> 
> 
> On Dec 6, 2016 11:16 AM, "Rana"  > wrote:
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org
> ] On Behalf Of pa011
> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 1:24 AM
> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> 
> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with
> dynamic IP
> 
> 
> > I would like to hear about ONE Raspi Tor operator who was allowed
> by DirAuths (or bwauths or whatever)  to come even near 1 mbit/s
> bandwidth utilization
> >
> 
> let me tell:
> 
> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/AA44C4BE3C90DCAAC09E5CD26150710AAA80D58B
> 
> 
> 
> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/CA9A5D5C4688F04EEC1AF810B0FD348109FA17FB
> 
> 
> 
> are sharing the same dynamic IP on a Rasp2 -cut every 24 hours
> 
>  day rx  | tx  |total|   avg. rate
>
>  +-+-+---
>  05.12.201627,20 GiB |   28,39 GiB |   55,59 GiB |5,40
> Mbit/s
> 
> 
> that is slight above 1 Mbit/s  :-)
> 
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> Wow nice bandwidth you are pushing through Paul! You mean two Raspi
> 2's sharing an Internet connection, each relaying 27 Gbytes per day
> at 5.4 Mbit/s on the average?? Total 10.8 Mbit/s?? Or 2.7 Mbit/s each?
> 
> Definitely refutes the previously claimed 1 Mbit/s Tor limit on
> Raspi, and means that Raspi has nothing to do with the ridiculously
> low utilization of my relay, just as I thought. As a matter of fact
> this means that whoever is NOT running a relay on a Raspi  (or two,
> or four of them) is wasting money, unless he has a computer lying
> about with nothing better to do.
> 
> Also, what's the max memory and CPU utilization on your Raspi (I
> have read somewhere that Tor is only capable of utilizing 2 of the 4
> CPU cores), and what kind of Internet connection do you have?
> 
>  BTW the $35 Raspi 3 has 33% more CPU power than your Raspi 2 and
> the same amount of memory.
> 
> Rana
> 
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org 
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] network diversity with freeBSD - solved

[diffusae]

Hi Tim!

Thanks a lot for your hint.

I've changed it. I'd recognized the public IPs with arm, but didn't know
the circumstances. Now it should be in a more secure mode,
than before.

Regards,

On 05.12.2016 23:49, teor wrote:
> 
>> On 6 Dec. 2016, at 08:32, diffusae  wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 05.12.2016 21:32, pa011 wrote:
>>> its working currently on Tor 0.2.8.9 (recommended)
>>> otherwise it might conflict with arm?
>>
>> Yes I know this, you could solve this with a jail. So if you run
>> tor-devel inside a jail and use a cloned loopback interface for the
>> control port.
> 
> It's much better to use a unix socket for the control connection.
> 
> ControlPort unix:/path/no/spaces
> 
> (There's a bug in parsing control socket paths with spaces that's fixed
> in 0.2.9.4-alpha, but not 0.2.8.)
> 
> Loopback interfaces and jails have a tendency to leave your control port
> open on a public IP address if configured incorrectly. Some jail setups
> default to this insecure mode.
> 
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/17901
> 
> T
> 
>>> Any quick idea how to solve that one:
>>
>>> To connect to svn.torproject.org insecurely, use 
>>> `--no-check-certificate'.
>>
>> pkg install ca_root_nss should help. With curl I can connect to svn.
>>
>> Welcome to svn.torproject.org!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Reiner
>>
>>> Am 05.12.2016 um 18:42 schrieb diffusae:
 Hi!

 That's nice to hear.

 RAM is also very good for tor relays. :-)

 Maybe you want to change your version to tor-devel-0.2.9.5.a, if you
 don't done this already (e. g. portsnap fetch update && portmaster
 security/tor-devel).

 Regards,


 On 05.12.2016 18:32, pa011 wrote:
> Working :-)
>
> It looks like it was missing the Address in torrc. 
> I added up some RAM before- that didn’t help.
>
> Ok, now I have time to follow up all your other recommendations in the 
> coming days.
>
> Thank you all very much for your help!
>
> Best Regards 
> Paul
>
> p.s. as it is finally that easy to get BSD running, hopefully more will 
> follow in diversifying the tor world. 
>
>
>>
>> You might also want to try setting the "Address" knob.
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>
 ___
 tor-relays mailing list
 tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
 https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

>>> ___
>>> tor-relays mailing list
>>> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>>>
>> ___
>> tor-relays mailing list
>> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
> T
> 
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] relays with dynamic IP - here Rasp2

[diffusae]

Hi!

That's from today:

rx  | tx  |total|   avg. rate
 +-+-+---
 today  6,26 GiB |5,21 GiB |   11,47 GiB |  1,27 Mbit/s


It's just a "low" bandwidth, but this depends on the ISP. It's a RPi-B
plus and it can't handle more than around 2000 TCP connections
simultaneously unless you are not using the normal CPU speed (700 MHz).

If there would be more bandwidth, than it should be higher.

Regards,


On 06.12.2016 19:25, pa011 wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 06.12.2016 um 18:16 schrieb Rana:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf 
>> Of pa011
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 1:24 AM
>> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic 
>> IP
>>
>>  
>>> I would like to hear about ONE Raspi Tor operator who was allowed by 
>>> DirAuths (or bwauths or whatever)  to come even near 1 mbit/s bandwidth 
>>> utilization
>>>
>>
>> let me tell: 
>> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/AA44C4BE3C90DCAAC09E5CD26150710AAA80D58B
>> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/CA9A5D5C4688F04EEC1AF810B0FD348109FA17FB
>>
>> are sharing the same dynamic IP on a Rasp2 -cut every 24 hours
>>
>>  day rx  | tx  |total|   avg. rate
>>  +-+-+---
>>  05.12.201627,20 GiB |   28,39 GiB |   55,59 GiB |5,40 Mbit/s
>>
>>
>> that is slight above 1 Mbit/s  :-)
>>
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Paul
>> 
>>
>> Wow nice bandwidth you are pushing through Paul! You mean two Raspi 2's 
>> sharing an Internet connection, each relaying 27 Gbytes per day at 5.4 
>> Mbit/s on the average?? Total 10.8 Mbit/s?? Or 2.7 Mbit/s each?
> 
> It is just 1 single Rasp2 - running 2 tor instances on 1 IP, details here 
> https://gitweb.torproject.org/debian/tor.git/tree/debian/tor-instance-create.8.txt
>>
>> Definitely refutes the previously claimed 1 Mbit/s Tor limit on Raspi, and 
>> means that Raspi has nothing to do with the ridiculously low utilization of 
>> my relay, just as I thought. As a matter of fact this means that whoever is 
>> NOT running a relay on a Raspi  (or two, or four of them) is wasting money, 
>> unless he has a computer lying about with nothing better to do.
>>
>> Also, what's the max memory and CPU utilization on your Raspi (I have read 
>> somewhere that Tor is only capable of utilizing 2 of the 4 CPU cores), and 
>> what kind of Internet connection do you have?
> 
> The Rasp2 is fairly unused, in memory and CPU - running on a German DSL - 
> giving tested max. 7Mbit/s upload
> 
> 
> top - 19:15:15 up 47 days,  1:11,  2 users,  load average: 0,37, 0,26, 0,24
> Tasks: 118 total,   2 running, 116 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
> %Cpu(s): 10,3 us,  1,9 sy,  0,0 ni, 86,4 id,  0,0 wa,  0,0 hi,  1,4 si,  0,0 
> st
> KiB Mem:947756 total,   831368 used,   116388 free,   147964 buffers
> KiB Swap:   102396 total,0 used,   102396 free.   426736 cached Mem
> 
> 
> 
>>  BTW the $35 Raspi 3 has 33% more CPU power than your Raspi 2 and the same 
>> amount of memory.
> 
> There is no need for a Rasp3 under given condition - not even the Rasp2 is 
> getting warm :-)
>>
>> Rana
> 
>  
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] relays with dynamic IP - here Rasp2

[pa011]

Am 06.12.2016 um 18:16 schrieb Rana:
> -Original Message-
> From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf 
> Of pa011
> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 1:24 AM
> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP
> 
>  
>> I would like to hear about ONE Raspi Tor operator who was allowed by 
>> DirAuths (or bwauths or whatever)  to come even near 1 mbit/s bandwidth 
>> utilization
>>
> 
> let me tell: 
> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/AA44C4BE3C90DCAAC09E5CD26150710AAA80D58B
> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/CA9A5D5C4688F04EEC1AF810B0FD348109FA17FB
> 
> are sharing the same dynamic IP on a Rasp2 -cut every 24 hours
> 
>  day rx  | tx  |total|   avg. rate
>  +-+-+---
>  05.12.201627,20 GiB |   28,39 GiB |   55,59 GiB |5,40 Mbit/s
> 
> 
> that is slight above 1 Mbit/s  :-)
> 
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> Wow nice bandwidth you are pushing through Paul! You mean two Raspi 2's 
> sharing an Internet connection, each relaying 27 Gbytes per day at 5.4 Mbit/s 
> on the average?? Total 10.8 Mbit/s?? Or 2.7 Mbit/s each?

It is just 1 single Rasp2 - running 2 tor instances on 1 IP, details here 
https://gitweb.torproject.org/debian/tor.git/tree/debian/tor-instance-create.8.txt
> 
> Definitely refutes the previously claimed 1 Mbit/s Tor limit on Raspi, and 
> means that Raspi has nothing to do with the ridiculously low utilization of 
> my relay, just as I thought. As a matter of fact this means that whoever is 
> NOT running a relay on a Raspi  (or two, or four of them) is wasting money, 
> unless he has a computer lying about with nothing better to do.
> 
> Also, what's the max memory and CPU utilization on your Raspi (I have read 
> somewhere that Tor is only capable of utilizing 2 of the 4 CPU cores), and 
> what kind of Internet connection do you have?

The Rasp2 is fairly unused, in memory and CPU - running on a German DSL - 
giving tested max. 7Mbit/s upload


top - 19:15:15 up 47 days,  1:11,  2 users,  load average: 0,37, 0,26, 0,24
Tasks: 118 total,   2 running, 116 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
%Cpu(s): 10,3 us,  1,9 sy,  0,0 ni, 86,4 id,  0,0 wa,  0,0 hi,  1,4 si,  0,0 st
KiB Mem:947756 total,   831368 used,   116388 free,   147964 buffers
KiB Swap:   102396 total,0 used,   102396 free.   426736 cached Mem



>  BTW the $35 Raspi 3 has 33% more CPU power than your Raspi 2 and the same 
> amount of memory.

There is no need for a Rasp3 under given condition - not even the Rasp2 is 
getting warm :-)
> 
> Rana

 
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

[Tristan]

Again, bits or bytes. I can't believe I'm repeating myself, don't you
people read?

The ORIGINAL (version 1) Raspberry Pi had a max of 1 MegaBYTE.

1 MegaBYTE = 8 megaBITS

Obviously other factors limit performance, but looking at just the maximum
network capacity of a Raspberry Pi 1, it could handle 8Mbit/s.


On Dec 6, 2016 11:16 AM, "Rana"  wrote:

-Original Message-
From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf
Of pa011
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 1:24 AM
To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic
IP


> I would like to hear about ONE Raspi Tor operator who was allowed by
DirAuths (or bwauths or whatever)  to come even near 1 mbit/s bandwidth
utilization
>

let me tell:
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/AA44C4BE3C90DCAAC09E5CD2615071
0AAA80D58B
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/CA9A5D5C4688F04EEC1AF810B0FD34
8109FA17FB

are sharing the same dynamic IP on a Rasp2 -cut every 24 hours

 day rx  | tx  |total|   avg. rate
 +-+-+---
 05.12.201627,20 GiB |   28,39 GiB |   55,59 GiB |5,40 Mbit/s


that is slight above 1 Mbit/s  :-)


Best regards

Paul


Wow nice bandwidth you are pushing through Paul! You mean two Raspi 2's
sharing an Internet connection, each relaying 27 Gbytes per day at 5.4
Mbit/s on the average?? Total 10.8 Mbit/s?? Or 2.7 Mbit/s each?

Definitely refutes the previously claimed 1 Mbit/s Tor limit on Raspi, and
means that Raspi has nothing to do with the ridiculously low utilization of
my relay, just as I thought. As a matter of fact this means that whoever is
NOT running a relay on a Raspi  (or two, or four of them) is wasting money,
unless he has a computer lying about with nothing better to do.

Also, what's the max memory and CPU utilization on your Raspi (I have read
somewhere that Tor is only capable of utilizing 2 of the 4 CPU cores), and
what kind of Internet connection do you have?

 BTW the $35 Raspi 3 has 33% more CPU power than your Raspi 2 and the same
amount of memory.

Rana

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Updating wiki - good bad isps

[teor]

> On 6 Dec. 2016, at 21:40, heartsucker  wrote:
> 
> If you attempt to edit the wiki, this error shows up:
> 
> Submission rejected as potential spam
> 
>Content contained these blacklisted patterns: 'http:',
> '(?i)(call|customer|technical).?support'
> 
> Since these patters already exist in the wiki, I can't make updates.
> 
> -h

Oh dear. Someone has supercharged the trac spam filter again.

You can open a ticket on https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor for both 
issues,
Or you can report the changed ISP details here and someone will fix it.

> On 12/06/2016 11:33 AM, teor wrote:
>> 
>>> On 6 Dec. 2016, at 21:15, Sec INT  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> Does anyone know a contact for updating the wiki page for good bad isps - 
>>> im using five of them and one is not doing what is advertised - i.e. 
>>> Shutting off an exit node each time a spam abuse emailer asks them to 
>>> despite there being little evidence to back up their claims 
>>> 
>>> regards
>>> 
>>> Mark B
>> 
>> Feel free to make an account and update the wiki yourself.
>> Or you can open a ticket on https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor
>> Or you can report the details here and someone will fix it.
>> 
>> T
>> 
> 
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

T

-- 
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org




___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Updating wiki - good bad isps

[heartsucker]

If you attempt to edit the wiki, this error shows up:

Submission rejected as potential spam

Content contained these blacklisted patterns: 'http:',
'(?i)(call|customer|technical).?support'

Since these patters already exist in the wiki, I can't make updates.

-h

On 12/06/2016 11:33 AM, teor wrote:
> 
>> On 6 Dec. 2016, at 21:15, Sec INT  wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Does anyone know a contact for updating the wiki page for good bad isps - im 
>> using five of them and one is not doing what is advertised - i.e. Shutting 
>> off an exit node each time a spam abuse emailer asks them to despite there 
>> being little evidence to back up their claims 
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Mark B
> 
> Feel free to make an account and update the wiki yourself.
> Or you can open a ticket on https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor
> Or you can report the details here and someone will fix it.
> 
> T
> 



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Updating wiki - good bad isps

[teor]

> On 6 Dec. 2016, at 21:15, Sec INT  wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> Does anyone know a contact for updating the wiki page for good bad isps - im 
> using five of them and one is not doing what is advertised - i.e. Shutting 
> off an exit node each time a spam abuse emailer asks them to despite there 
> being little evidence to back up their claims 
> 
> regards
> 
> Mark B

Feel free to make an account and update the wiki yourself.
Or you can open a ticket on https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor
Or you can report the details here and someone will fix it.

T

-- 
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org




___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

[tor-relays] Updating wiki - good bad isps

[Sec INT]

Hi

Does anyone know a contact for updating the wiki page for good bad isps - im 
using five of them and one is not doing what is advertised - i.e. Shutting off 
an exit node each time a spam abuse emailer asks them to despite there being 
little evidence to back up their claims 

regards

Mark B 

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays