Re: [tor-relays] Operator straw poll: Reasons why you use Tor LTS versions?
On Thu, 05 Sep 2019 02:11:00 + Mike Perry wrote: > 1. "I didn't know that Debian's backports repo has latest-stable Tor!" I only looked to backports when I get a warning on the metrics website that my versions are not recommended. Aside from that, I thought that running LTS on relays is actually beneficial, to prevent any newly introduced bugs in the current latest versions from having an impact on the network infrastructure. > 2. "I didn't see the Tor Project repos mentioned in Tor's Relay docs!" I was using them in the past, but then decided not to, as it's adding some management overhead and also one more potential security weakpoint. -- 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] Operator straw poll: Reasons why you use Tor LTS versions?
Hi, On 5 Sep 2019, at 13:01, Mike Perry wrote: >> 8. I am maintaining research or other patches against tor, and rebases >> are difficult > > Again, common? I'm going to guess not common (or self-supporting), but > this does feel like something we could measure by checking for git > versions that don't make sense to us in the full descriptor archives. That could be hard: some distros add their own patches using git. >>> How can we fix that for you, or at least, how can we make it easier to >>> run the very latest stable series Tor on your relay? >> >> The answers are probably something like: >> 6. Provide better relay operator support, and direct me to those support >> channels in the log messages, when my relay fails to launch > > Show Quoted Content >>> How can we fix that for you, or at least, how can we make it easier to >>> run the very latest stable series Tor on your relay? >> >> The answers are probably something like: >> 6. Provide better relay operator support, and direct me to those support >> channels in the log messages, when my relay fails to launch > > > +1 100%. I think this will go light years towards getting rid of non-LTS > Tors and LTS tor's alike, regardless of reason. Then we can ask the > remainder. > >> 7. Support old features for longer> 8. Stop refactoring so much code > > Nah. I'm not interested in these, even if populism demands them. Some > shit needs to go away because it is not safe to keep around, and some > stuff needs to be better organized to make it easier to improve. I agree. But you asked for answers, so I gave them. T___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Operator straw poll: Reasons why you use Tor LTS versions?
teor: >> On 5 Sep 2019, at 12:11, Mike Perry wrote: >> >> Unfortunately, we still have something like 2500 relays on either Tor >> 0.2.9-LTS or Tor 0.3.5-LTS. >> >> What are the reasons for this? My guess is the top 5 most common >> responses are: >> >> 1. "I didn't know that Debian's backports repo has latest-stable Tor!" >> 2. "I didn't see the Tor Project repos mentioned in Tor's Relay docs!" >> 3. "I'm running a distribution that Tor Project doesn't have repos for." >> 4. "I rolled my own custom Tor from git and forgot about it." >> 5. "My relay machine was not getting any updates at all. Oops." >> >> Does anyone have a reason that they think many other relay operators >> also share? > > 6. When I tried to update, it didn't work with my old config> 7. I need > features that only exist in older Tors > - I can think of Tor2web, there may be others Are these common? I feel like this is long-tail. I'm looking for most common reasons first. After we address the most common reasons, we can pick our favorite long-tail use cases and decide if those are worth forward-porting or back-porting individual features for. But not before the common cases are dealt with. That way lies madness, and no progress, ever. > 8. I am maintaining research or other patches against tor, and rebases >are difficult Again, common? I'm going to guess not common (or self-supporting), but this does feel like something we could measure by checking for git versions that don't make sense to us in the full descriptor archives. >> How can we fix that for you, or at least, how can we make it easier to >> run the very latest stable series Tor on your relay? > > The answers are probably something like: > 6. Provide better relay operator support, and direct me to those support >channels in the log messages, when my relay fails to launch +1 100%. I think this will go light years towards getting rid of non-LTS Tors and LTS tor's alike, regardless of reason. Then we can ask the remainder. > 7. Support old features for longer> 8. Stop refactoring so much code Nah. I'm not interested in these, even if populism demands them. Some shit needs to go away because it is not safe to keep around, and some stuff needs to be better organized to make it easier to improve. -- Mike Perry 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] Operator straw poll: Reasons why you use Tor LTS versions?
Hi Mike, Here's some other reasons that might affect a few operators: > On 5 Sep 2019, at 12:11, Mike Perry wrote: > > Unfortunately, we still have something like 2500 relays on either Tor > 0.2.9-LTS or Tor 0.3.5-LTS. > > What are the reasons for this? My guess is the top 5 most common > responses are: > > 1. "I didn't know that Debian's backports repo has latest-stable Tor!" > 2. "I didn't see the Tor Project repos mentioned in Tor's Relay docs!" > 3. "I'm running a distribution that Tor Project doesn't have repos for." > 4. "I rolled my own custom Tor from git and forgot about it." > 5. "My relay machine was not getting any updates at all. Oops." > > Does anyone have a reason that they think many other relay operators > also share? 6. When I tried to update, it didn't work with my old config 7. I need features that only exist in older Tors - I can think of Tor2web, there may be others 8. I am maintaining research or other patches against tor, and rebases are difficult > How can we fix that for you, or at least, how can we make it easier to > run the very latest stable series Tor on your relay? The answers are probably something like: 6. Provide better relay operator support, and direct me to those support channels in the log messages, when my relay fails to launch 7. Support old features for longer 8. Stop refactoring so much code T ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
[tor-relays] Operator straw poll: Reasons why you use Tor LTS versions?
Hello relay operators, Thanks for running relays, and thanks to those of you who are moving off of our old EOL Tor versions. Thanks especially to those of you who moved directly to Tor 0.4.1! We would like to transition the LTS Tor to be for use in edge/client/non-relay infrastructure only. We would like to minimize even that use. We need to update our network protocols to improve performance, security, and to add defenses against DoS attacks. Doing this while supporting LTS for relays is expensive, especially when large backports must be done to keep the network safe. It also slows down the uniform deployment of performance improvements, which contributes to the frustrating user experience of abysmal-but-rare performance edge cases. Unfortunately, we still have something like 2500 relays on either Tor 0.2.9-LTS or Tor 0.3.5-LTS. What are the reasons for this? My guess is the top 5 most common responses are: 1. "I didn't know that Debian's backports repo has latest-stable Tor!" 2. "I didn't see the Tor Project repos mentioned in Tor's Relay docs!" 3. "I'm running a distribution that Tor Project doesn't have repos for." 4. "I rolled my own custom Tor from git and forgot about it." 5. "My relay machine was not getting any updates at all. Oops." Does anyone have a reason that they think many other relay operators also share? How can we fix that for you, or at least, how can we make it easier to run the very latest stable series Tor on your relay? -- Mike Perry 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] Low-bandwidth relay
On 9/4/19 06:21, John Williams wrote: > I've been running tor on my openwrt-based home router (along the lines of > 'anonabox'), and I configured it as a non-exit relay, because I thought why > not - every little helps, right? I set a very low bandwidth limit, but it was > using most of the configured bandwidth, so I figured it was helping. > > A few days ago I got an email saying my tor version was EOL, so I upgraded > from version 0.3.2.10 to 0.4.1.5 (which required upgrading openwrt). Now tor > is still working fine for me, but I don't see any network traffic when I'm > not using it, so it is evidently not routing any third-party traffic any > more. I don't see any errors in the log. It doesn't seem like there's anything wrong with your relay[0]. It's slow, doesn't have much weight, and doesn't have the Guard flag. All normal for a slow relay. It also is reachable from all the authorities (go to [1] and paste your fingerprint in at the bottom). I don't know how you're determining whether or not your relay is handling traffic, but maybe something changed in Tor that makes your tool fail to report the traffic Tor is handling (I think this is unlikely). Perhaps you weren't paying close attention to how much your relay was handling hour-by-hour before since everything was fine, but now since you just upgraded you are hyper-aware of what you're relay is handling and are perceiving an issue where there isn't one (I think this is more likely). Or somewhat similarly, since your relay is so small, it is hardly ever chosen by people. Before you had your relay running for 10s or 100s of days at a time nonstop (just a guess) so it had time to accumulate a couple people using it nonstop constantly, causing it to consume all its very limited bandwidth. But now it has only been online for 20 hours and hasn't accumulated anyone significant. I also think this is more likely than the first time. Finally, perhaps the upgrade serendipitously or causally coincides with a slower measurement from the bandwidth authorities. If this is the case, there's nothing you can do. These things happen. The bandwidth measurement system Tor uses is imperfect and confusing and prone to unsatisfying-ly explainable behavior. Hope that helps. Thanks for running a relay. To a some extent, a relay existing is the majority of the contribution and the specific amount of traffic it carries day-to-day is less important. [0]: https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/3DA54600E615E5AF841C03FB81D7321735562B5B [1]: https://consensus-health.torproject.org/ -- Matt ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
