Re: [tor-relays] Guard flag and some irregularities
hmm... I'll keep an eye on it but I do not see TCP or UDP floods coming in. It is quite peaceful actually. Thanks. Like I said, I don't mind getting more traffic as long as the server can handle it stable. I know what my contribution should be and I was well aware when I fired up my relay. My best to you all. On 2014-12-06 16:02, Sebastian Urbach wrote: > On December 6, 2014 9:41:34 PM Rafael Rodriguez wrote: > > Hi, > >> https://atlas.thecthulhu.com/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 >> [1] 1- Is it ok for the Guard flag to come and go so often? I do not see >> anything wrong with my relay and it is pushing up to 12MBs at times. > > From what i can see the numbers are way lower than that. Recently the > criterias to qualify as a guard changed, i assume that you drop out of the > guard position because you don't make the cut all the time. If im not > mistaken the number of guards dropped roughly 50 % after the changes were > implemented. > >> Most of the time, my relay pushes between 3-7MB/s constantly and that's >> fine. But there are occasions in which I see it spike and send out as much >> as 12MB/s > > I'm struggling with the numbers, if you take a look at the graphs you are not > getting this much traffic. Maybe your system is under attack (DoS, DDoS) ? It > does not look like it's regular Tor traffic ... > > -- > Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations > > Sebastian Urbach > > - > Definition of Tor: > 10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated > power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and > 100% reason to remember the name! > - > > ___ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays [2] Links: -- [1] https://atlas.thecthulhu.com/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 [2] 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] Guard flag and some irregularities
Hi Roger. My concern is not really bandwidth. I started the relay with 2MB/s. I can always push some more and I'm gradually moving the bar up to the highest possible. I'm concerned because the VPS does have limited resources in terms of CPU and RAM. As long as the relay stays stable I have no problems sharing some more. I just don't want to crash the VPS by exhausting its resources and making the relay a tort. That's not healthy for the network hence my concerns. Yeah, I'm using arm to measure it and I think I've over-reacted because irrespective the spikes it is reporting 3.1Mb/s as average. I have now raised the limit to up to 10MB/s let's see how it handles it. Thanks for your input. I appreciate it. On 2014-12-06 15:54, Roger Dingledine wrote: > On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 03:40:41PM -0500, Rafael Rodriguez wrote: > >> https://atlas.thecthulhu.com/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 >> [1] 1- Is it ok for the Guard flag to come and go so often? > > Yes, it can oscillate for some relays, if some directory authorities > think the relay deserves the Guard flag and others don't. > > It's not great, and we should probably fix the design sometime, but > it's also not so bad. > >> I do not see anything wrong with my relay and it is pushing up to 12MBs at >> times. > > Are you sure? What tool are you using to measure this? If it's arm, be > ware that arm by default tells you throughput in bits, and Tor measures > things by bytes. > >> Most of the time, my relay pushes between 3-7MB/s constantly and that's >> fine. But there are occasions in which I see it spike and send out as much >> as 12MB/s when I have set a limit of @6MB/s. > > Based on the graphs above, you're using maybe .5MB/s each way on > average. That reinforces my guess about the bits/bytes confusion. > >> 2- Is Tor not respecting the limits? If it doesn't respect the limits >> consistently it might as well overkill my budget which translates into me >> killing the relay. > > See also > https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq#BandwidthShaping [2] > > Thanks for running a relay! > > --Roger > > ___ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays [3] Links: -- [1] https://atlas.thecthulhu.com/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 [2] https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq#BandwidthShaping [3] 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] Guard flag and some irregularities
https://atlas.thecthulhu.com/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 1- Is it ok for the Guard flag to come and go so often? I do not see anything wrong with my relay and it is pushing up to 12MBs at times. Most of the time, my relay pushes between 3-7MB/s constantly and that's fine. But there are occasions in which I see it spike and send out as much as 12MB/s when I have set a limit of @6MB/s. 2- Is Tor not respecting the limits? If it doesn't respect the limits consistently it might as well overkill my budget which translates into me killing the relay. ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Decision on Dedicated Server for Exit Node
Hi, My personal experience with them was awful... but then again it could've just been my personal experience. I paid ahead of time for one "hybrid" server from BalticServers and I will try to avoid them at all cost (Total amount: 164.59 EUR) per month/ 6 months. They may have had improved their service over time though; I don't know but I won't put my money in again to find out. On 2014-11-21 18:45, Niklas Kielblock wrote: > Hello, > > I can't say much about BalticServers in general, but their AS currently > houses nine relays, two of which are exits (search compass.torproject.org for > AS59642). > You're increasing diversity as long as you're not adding to the upper half of > networks, so I think that should be fine. > > niklas > > On 22/11/2014 00:28, Libertas wrote: > >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 I've been looking for a >> budget dedicated server to host an exit node on, and the best option I've >> found is BalticServers. However, they're already listed on the GoodBadISPs >> wiki page, and because they're in Northeast Europe (Lithuania, to be >> precise) I'm concerned that their ISP already has more exit nodes than is >> healthy for network diversity. Is it a good idea to host another exit node >> there? If you think there's a better option, I'd appreciate it if you could >> tell me either publicly or privately. Thanks, Libertas -BEGIN PGP >> SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 >> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJUb8qfAAoJELxHvGCsI27Nx0sP/j5wBhV7EJZZ4EJoPgnoEH8A >> i6cDB3sL+Q50MgZivZLG47U+wdj95EJeIRl16RsaL0JaShVwyvbpStaIuhpOoujX >> FN0oumg3Z27fists+CSImLAHHHyr3a526XbWQazKZ7ReBvBZeIOa4PKA/OWsI8wg >> CWogwEWxbVNMojWaHMID3Y43qEeSH/T0R9ibqyrvqoZrOhnVqH1+1HzVs4FAWoST >> UMS2m/+b1qL4riL20XyaS0SUO0OkNbL3ecBnCN9LZJwMMuXVB4QNrsBSNFtDTpeu r8ZPJ/DxLJuQOtOvluSqqriKZCCi2lFAHovcXAf2ele0xqPrnJLFXDvhKkuAlv2o wQb+hdpBZ95u073cu/md8vTYVzA8NJ/sRTPmsWtxdRR8PMVpx59+BOAWNYMLWgEu JdTVinsbaWuKKTCtsZY0KAmYRbYC8E0O46z3OnOaeLX2s4MLUK/rPV3FoOAJ0tA3 ixnJ0kjuaFiBN7SRn+N4imBEmt5DP3cbPmai6YX5FzaL0RjlD+1uWk/ZxV66iK3c YrisgQ0bWFbVCGeztblvBGQF3o6cElCJ26Cvy3EaTn7No+1d4f+/1rYwYCmNHjYY mdfUhSfWWFNv+oaF9MU/IHek45l+yrTHHZlhrk3pmFX/bcUWWcfcYX1D/aMhgH58 7p48+5liXZOtSuVK44aS =/fUH -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays [1] > > ___ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays [1] Links: -- [1] 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] Bwauths Measures question, friends.
Julien, Everything is going well now. I've seen spikes going as high as 8MB/s. Atlas shows 1.x MB/s measured already and the consensus weight has picked up a little too. It's been improving slowly. The problem was my iptables (embarrassing). I had (by mistake) blacklisted Tor IPs :-| Thanks again. On 2014-11-05 07:10, Julien ROBIN wrote: > Wow, it's not very good > With an advertised bandwidth raising 1,03MB your consensus weight is now > updated to 13 (it's far too low). > > It means that somethings goes bad when bwauth is testing your relay, so even > with a very good advertised bandwidth, your final score keeps ultra-low, and > with such a consensus wieght, your relay keeps unused by clients. > > I have no idea from where can be the problem (and the solution), technically > it could be the ISP that blocks bw auth, but in real facts it would be pretty > strange. > > Try to transport your relay (/var/lib/tor/keys and /etc/tor/torrc) to another > computer on the same connection (the more different, the better), if it still > doesn't works, it means something at your connection make a problem. > > Double check your upload rate is good (since everything have to be > transmitted, the lowest bandwidth (generally upload) applies to the relay). > > If your relay appears to be online it means that it means that port > redirections is well configured, so I'm not sure that something else could be > misconfigured into it (if you have several ones, test a different one) > > Let us know when you find the solution ! This problem is surprising but it > cannot be nowhere ;) > > - Mail original - > De: "Rafael Rodriguez" > À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > Envoyé: Mercredi 5 Novembre 2014 00:13:37 > Objet: Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends. > > Indeed, Julien. > > As a matter of fact I saw the server (using the Tor network) pushing up to > 8.8MB/s at some point while I was using it as a proxy in my setup. That was > yesterday. As soon as I closed the SocksListenAddress I was connecting to, it > went back to almost not existent cos' it is weighted 10. Even the Fast flag > isn't there. As I said, I'm waiting to see if it picks up relevance in the > next day or so. > > On 2014-11-04 14:26, Julien ROBIN wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > On Tor Atlas after a little time offset, your download seems now to appear > into your server stats. > https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 > [1] Your Advertised Bandwidth seems now to be better : 866.83 KB/s > But the consensus weight is still at 10 (it's like zero) for now (let's wait > less that one day) > > In the following hours, we will see if the "consensus weight" value can be > better thanks to that (so then true clients will start using the bandwidth > and nourish your advertised bandwith). > > If I remember well what I read before, the consensus weight, when > recalculated, is the result of your Advertised Bandwidth multiplied by a > coefficient obtained by bw authorites (when periodically testing your > server). If it's congestionned, the test gives low result and your consensus > weight is reduced. If it's really good, your consensus weight is increased > (and your server usage too). > > If your consensus weight is stuck at 10 and doesn't increase, it would mean > that bw authorities cannot test your server and always gives "zero" as > coefficient (if so, you will have to check everything on your network : > router, softwares, etc) > > The answer is near :) > > - Mail original - > De: "Rafael Rodriguez" < rafa...@icctek.com > > À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org Envoyé: Lundi 3 Novembre 2014 22:04:24 > Objet: Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends. > > Hi Julien, > > Thanks for the tip. I did ssh'd tunnel into my Tor server and I can pull > downloads at 1-2MB/s as expected. I do not see my server getting any better > in measurements though. After 4 days running my Advertised Bandwidth is > barely 62kb/s and its Consensus Weight is 10. I wouldn't mind as long as it > serves our Tor community but I'm under the impression that something is just > not quite right. This box was put in place specifically to put all its > bandwidth to good use and help the network. I have the feeling that a Relay > measured at such low speeds does more harm than good to the network. I will > keep it up there running as it is since I cannot pinpoint a problem at this > time and maybe it just needs to stay online for a longer period of time. > > --- >
Re: [tor-relays] Windows Tor Server Guide
That's indeed pretty handy. Now we just need to put a guide together somewhere and point to that download section. I do not mind writing a step by step guide with screenshots. Only if we had a section in the Tor Project where to post it. I'm planning to write it up in one of my old blogs in the mean time and maybe someone shows interest in copying it over to the Tor Project? Anyone? On 2014-11-05 11:13, Roger Dingledine wrote: > On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 05:25:28PM -0500, Nick Mathewson wrote: > >> I'd suggest that you start by posting your process to this mailing list, so >> that other folks can add improvements for it. (Though I hope that expert >> packages in some form will return soon.) > > The expert packages have indeed returned, albeit in a slightly > different form. See https://dist.torproject.org/torbrowser/4.0.1/ [1] > and scroll down to tor-win32-tor-0.2.5.10.zip > > But nobody has linked to them from the download page; and I think it > might require a bit of thought to make our links on the download page auto > update to the new location of this zip after future Tor Browser releases. > > --Roger > > ___ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays [2] Links: -- [1] https://dist.torproject.org/torbrowser/4.0.1/ [2] 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] Windows Tor Server Guide
Hi, here is it. Please, feel free to contribute to it. RUNNING A TOR SERVER IN WINDOWS - Download latest Tor Browser Bundle. - Install to c:tor - Create a temporary folder on your Desktop and name it "server". - Copy all files from C:TorBrowserTorBrowserDataTor to the "server" folder on the Desktop. - Browse to C:TorBrowserTorBrowserTor; delete the folder "PluggableTransports" and it content. - Copy all files from C:TorBrowserTorBrowserTor to the "server" folder on the Desktop. - Browse to C:Tor and delete everything inside that folder. C:Tor should be completely empty at this point. - Move all files from the "server" folder on your Desktop to C:Tor - Browse to C:Tor and create a new folder named "datadir". - Create a new text file in C:Tor named "notices" (I myself use notices.log but we want to keep it simple for users who may not know how to change the file extension from .txt to .log) - EDIT C:TORTORRC FILE: (this could be the torrc-defaults file and all its comments). Note that the sample below is just for references. Each user needs to define her/his own parameters based on their own needs and that's impossible for me to cover in a single file for everyone. Hence, each parameter should be included in the torrc-defaults with due comments to be used as reference. Also, noted that I'm using IPv4 geoip by default. Users using IPv6 should define geoip6 in their torrc file. Then again, I cannot use a single sample file for all deployments. The defaults file should be used as reference once again. DATADIRECTORY .DATADIR LOG NOTICE FILE .NOTICES.TXT GEOIPFILE .GEOIP AvoidDiskWrites 1 SocksPort 0 ORPort 9001 DirPort 9030 ExitPolicy reject *:* Nickname RelayBandwidthRate RelayBandwidthBurst Up until this point, all I've written is nothing more than using the default Tor Bundle to create a "Server" package. All steps above could be made easier for users if a "Tor Windows Server" package was available for download on the Tor Project or somewhere else. I refuse the idea of creating such package myself to distribute it since many packages could start floating on the net and bad intentioned people could bundle them with arbitrary code, viruses and so on. A Windows Installer package can be built for distribution though. Next, I will address the two main things we need to run tor as a Windows service (server): 1- Install Tor as Windows Service. 2- Security (Isolating the Tor service). INSTALL TOR AS WINDOWS SERVICE I personally use nssm [2] (Non-Sucking Service Manager) myself to register the service but feel free to use default Windows tools for registering Tor service if you believe so. Anyways, irrespective the tool used to register the Tor service, we just need the following: Service: C:Tortor.exe Name: TorServer Parameters: -f C:Tortorrc Start the TorServer service and everything should just work at this point. The datadir directory will be populated with tor files once started and the notices.txt file will also reflect so. SECURITY (Quick explanation - We can go into details later) - Create a Standard user account and name it Tor with a strong password. - Policies: 1- Deny access to this computer from the network 2- Deny log on locally 3- Deny log on through Remote Desktop Services - NTFS Permissions for Tor windows user account: 1- Read/Write permissions to datadir folder 2- Read/Write permissions to notices.txt or (notices.log) file - Open Services, Start -> Run -> type "services.msc" without quotes, press enter and your Services window will pop up. Scroll down and find the TorServer service and double click it. Move to the LOG ON tab and set the "Log on as: This account: .TOR. Enter the strong password for the Tor user account in the password field and apply changes. Restart the service and now Tor will be running in its own isolated/limited account in Windows. 954-610-4545 On 2014-11-04 18:06, Rafael Rodriguez wrote: > Does the mailing list accept images in emails? The process is rather simple > but screenshots in a how-to is what makes it easy for not technical people. > > I will be posting the process to this mailing list in a few. > > On 2014-11-04 17:25, Nick Mathewson wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Rafael Rodriguez wrote: > Hello fellows, Where can we contribute (post a guide) to deploy Tor in > Windows without the extras unneeded stuff? I was looking for a Tor Server > installation guide on Windows to run Tor as a service. I did not wanted to > install all the extra browser stuff but a plain "Tor server" service and > secure it by giving the service its own limited account and write permissions > just to the datadir. Since I couldn't find information online to help me out, > I ended up using the latest Tor Browser package and removing everything
Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends.
Indeed, Julien. As a matter of fact I saw the server (using the Tor network) pushing up to 8.8MB/s at some point while I was using it as a proxy in my setup. That was yesterday. As soon as I closed the SocksListenAddress I was connecting to, it went back to almost not existent cos' it is weighted 10. Even the Fast flag isn't there. As I said, I'm waiting to see if it picks up relevance in the next day or so. On 2014-11-04 14:26, Julien ROBIN wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > On Tor Atlas after a little time offset, your download seems now to appear > into your server stats. > > https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 > [1] > > Your Advertised Bandwidth seems now to be better : 866.83 KB/s > But the consensus weight is still at 10 (it's like zero) for now (let's wait > less that one day) > > In the following hours, we will see if the "consensus weight" value can be > better thanks to that (so then true clients will start using the bandwidth > and nourish your advertised bandwith). > > If I remember well what I read before, the consensus weight, when > recalculated, is the result of your Advertised Bandwidth multiplied by a > coefficient obtained by bw authorites (when periodically testing your > server). If it's congestionned, the test gives low result and your consensus > weight is reduced. If it's really good, your consensus weight is increased > (and your server usage too). > > If your consensus weight is stuck at 10 and doesn't increase, it would mean > that bw authorities cannot test your server and always gives "zero" as > coefficient (if so, you will have to check everything on your network : > router, softwares, etc) > > The answer is near :) > > - Mail original - > De: "Rafael Rodriguez" > À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > Envoyé: Lundi 3 Novembre 2014 22:04:24 > Objet: Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends. > > Hi Julien, > > Thanks for the tip. I did ssh'd tunnel into my Tor server and I can pull > downloads at 1-2MB/s as expected. I do not see my server getting any better > in measurements though. After 4 days running my Advertised Bandwidth is > barely 62kb/s and its Consensus Weight is 10. I wouldn't mind as long as it > serves our Tor community but I'm under the impression that something is just > not quite right. This box was put in place specifically to put all its > bandwidth to good use and help the network. I have the feeling that a Relay > measured at such low speeds does more harm than good to the network. I will > keep it up there running as it is since I cannot pinpoint a problem at this > time and maybe it just needs to stay online for a longer period of time. > > --- > > On 2014-11-02 07:29, Julien ROBIN wrote: > > It strange you still haven't any used bandwidth > https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 > [1] I cannot explain you why but I have an idea for you in order to > "kickstart" your bandwidth usage. > > A tor process used to relay traffic also have the possibility to be used as > client. If it's at home, it's easy (socks v5 at 127.0.0.1:9050 if you haven't > changed anything), if your relay isn't at home, use SSH tunnelling to do so > (SSH session brings you to "localhost" on your remote computer, on the port > you choose) > > Try to download something through your relay, if nothing changed, even the > "client" bandwidth will be able to raise your advertised and used bandwidth > as server, in order for your server to "start" having weight on the network. > > Once "started", everything should be automatic but normally, the start is > also automatic after 2 or 3 days, so it is strange. > > May be it's because of the oversupply of "middle nodes" on the network (there > is so much middle nodes that most of them - the slowers - probably keep > totally unused). Without the guard flag (and it needs enough bandwidth) your > relay cannot be used as entry guard right now. > > Good luck ! > > - Mail original - > De: "Rafael Rodriguez" < rafa...@icctek.com > > À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org Envoyé: Samedi 1 Novembre 2014 16:16:24 > Objet: Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends. > > Maybe I should just wait longer but the 3 days unmetered has obviously been > passed already. That's why I'm asking about bwauths measurements. > > I was under the impression that after 3 days bwauths adjust your consensus > weight and raises your bandwidth e
Re: [tor-relays] Windows Tor Server Guide
Does the mailing list accept images in emails? The process is rather simple but screenshots in a how-to is what makes it easy for not technical people. I will be posting the process to this mailing list in a few. On 2014-11-04 17:25, Nick Mathewson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Rafael Rodriguez wrote: > >> Hello fellows, Where can we contribute (post a guide) to deploy Tor in >> Windows without the extras unneeded stuff? I was looking for a Tor Server >> installation guide on Windows to run Tor as a service. I did not wanted to >> install all the extra browser stuff but a plain "Tor server" service and >> secure it by giving the service its own limited account and write >> permissions just to the datadir. Since I couldn't find information online to >> help me out, I ended up using the latest Tor Browser package and removing >> everything except Tor itself and deployed it in two Windows servers as >> services. I would like to post somewhere in the Top project about the >> process for others to benefit from it. > > I'd suggest that you start by posting your process to this mailing > list, so that other folks can add improvements for it. (Though I hope > that expert packages in some form will return soon.) ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends.
Hi Julien, Thanks for the tip. I did ssh'd tunnel into my Tor server and I can pull downloads at 1-2MB/s as expected. I do not see my server getting any better in measurements though. After 4 days running my Advertised Bandwidth is barely 62kb/s and its Consensus Weight is 10. I wouldn't mind as long as it serves our Tor community but I'm under the impression that something is just not quite right. This box was put in place specifically to put all its bandwidth to good use and help the network. I have the feeling that a Relay measured at such low speeds does more harm than good to the network. I will keep it up there running as it is since I cannot pinpoint a problem at this time and maybe it just needs to stay online for a longer period of time. --- On 2014-11-02 07:29, Julien ROBIN wrote: > It strange you still haven't any used bandwidth > > https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 > [1] > > I cannot explain you why but I have an idea for you in order to "kickstart" > your bandwidth usage. > > A tor process used to relay traffic also have the possibility to be used as > client. If it's at home, it's easy (socks v5 at 127.0.0.1:9050 if you haven't > changed anything), if your relay isn't at home, use SSH tunnelling to do so > (SSH session brings you to "localhost" on your remote computer, on the port > you choose) > > Try to download something through your relay, if nothing changed, even the > "client" bandwidth will be able to raise your advertised and used bandwidth > as server, in order for your server to "start" having weight on the network. > > Once "started", everything should be automatic but normally, the start is > also automatic after 2 or 3 days, so it is strange. > > May be it's because of the oversupply of "middle nodes" on the network (there > is so much middle nodes that most of them - the slowers - probably keep > totally unused). Without the guard flag (and it needs enough bandwidth) your > relay cannot be used as entry guard right now. > > Good luck ! > > - Mail original - > De: "Rafael Rodriguez" > À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > Envoyé: Samedi 1 Novembre 2014 16:16:24 > Objet: Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends. > > Maybe I should just wait longer but the 3 days unmetered has obviously been > passed already. That's why I'm asking about bwauths measurements. > > I was under the impression that after 3 days bwauths adjust your consensus > weight and raises your bandwidth estimate. In this case, the server is simply > capped at 20kb/s still while my "advertise bandwidth" is little over 50kb/s. > Since I have a 2MB/s relay, I'm expecting to see at least over 100kb/s or > 250kb/s measurements to make my relay a usable one. Yet the advertised speed > hasn't changed. Is that normal and should I just give it more time? That's > what I'm trying to understand. > > On 2014-11-01 07:00, Krbusek Christian wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > You may want to read the following, which should make this more clear. > https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay [2] Cheers > > Am 01.11.2014 um 10:46 schrieb Rafael Rodriguez: > > Anyone knows how often bwauths measures a relay? I don't understand why > directory authorities have not lifted the 20KB cap for my older relay. Now I > have doubts if it could be a problem with my server. This is a 2MB/s relay > with burst of 4MB/s to start tuning it and increase it later if stable, which > is not being used and has been running for over 3 days. Is it normal for > Relays to take longer than three days to start getting at least some traffic > and for directory authorities to lift the 20KB cap? Fingerprint > 48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v2 > > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUVL1GAAoJECgP5Pn8Zk3/cfoQAI9bMRyx8hl3B+V+vSLC7xoJ > sfQedgt15LRyJ/+Ru3tQaPDPOkleTKR3rCnKaDiRCmjxibWt4liRUBji2nzDPFJU > dcD0kEXqCA/H3jyIJWvKnkxvzUfAjCZ7Y7b16sGsJSgVfZ8UFin52loTDgjSz7zU > tgsqsOBIHT72gr/hbxRBzr3ZP8LZqTDA5baoLFAxnYyxIQwK5eRefI6zMP9cuiOA > FL4I60Tige+TBp8kDnyKdYosxRJFkkAJN3YCuHuewIgoV0pD/xkScEscYgqp+CWu > cMQkj5NDDMP/I5ZXw2a64Etq33Hc4SzEm4HvKquu05pS2QgClXu7pg8z2u1BCdPQ > 7uMZRyKfAnOOwITKVxsKXT5XJySFJXskMLgupLtp3iEA24GfLJTax0pa7xmOeEbb > nvt2kGdrKvAl3t4PgwvtwuFmfJoqXzjxWMJJRD2s3hXi0TS4WC1y1pccw+INXKsG > 7sV+dHhqDPwOHpFleHv4RG207Kx6P8+hbNjdeVI8iEelAhKoPfcUJDM/A4aa2ahd > GB+vZrnuInJlZJeg+hL28Xk1pOxwHtq046nhLosVY7YNDW6CHoD5aruWeQdCT1y5 > AFZ/xqOP+XPWMYj/UJLhWoBFTjYjSUZuxi5c4nGpKoK/OSc1GCZERx8Ec7m
Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends.
Maybe I should just wait longer but the 3 days unmetered has obviously been passed already. That's why I'm asking about bwauths measurements. I was under the impression that after 3 days bwauths adjust your consensus weight and raises your bandwidth estimate. In this case, the server is simply capped at 20kb/s still while my "advertise bandwidth" is little over 50kb/s. Since I have a 2MB/s relay, I'm expecting to see at least over 100kb/s or 250kb/s measurements to make my relay a usable one. Yet the advertised speed hasn't changed. Is that normal and should I just give it more time? That's what I'm trying to understand. On 2014-11-01 07:00, Krbusek Christian wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > You may want to read the following, which should make this more clear. > > https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay [1]Cheers > > Am 01.11.2014 um 10:46 schrieb Rafael Rodriguez: > >> Anyone knows how often bwauths measures a relay? I don't understand why >> directory authorities have not lifted the 20KB cap for my older relay. Now I >> have doubts if it could be a problem with my server. This is a 2MB/s relay >> with burst of 4MB/s to start tuning it and increase it later if stable, >> which is not being used and has been running for over 3 days. Is it normal >> for Relays to take longer than three days to start getting at least some >> traffic and for directory authorities to lift the 20KB cap? Fingerprint >> 48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v2 > > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUVL1GAAoJECgP5Pn8Zk3/cfoQAI9bMRyx8hl3B+V+vSLC7xoJ > sfQedgt15LRyJ/+Ru3tQaPDPOkleTKR3rCnKaDiRCmjxibWt4liRUBji2nzDPFJU > dcD0kEXqCA/H3jyIJWvKnkxvzUfAjCZ7Y7b16sGsJSgVfZ8UFin52loTDgjSz7zU > tgsqsOBIHT72gr/hbxRBzr3ZP8LZqTDA5baoLFAxnYyxIQwK5eRefI6zMP9cuiOA > FL4I60Tige+TBp8kDnyKdYosxRJFkkAJN3YCuHuewIgoV0pD/xkScEscYgqp+CWu > cMQkj5NDDMP/I5ZXw2a64Etq33Hc4SzEm4HvKquu05pS2QgClXu7pg8z2u1BCdPQ > 7uMZRyKfAnOOwITKVxsKXT5XJySFJXskMLgupLtp3iEA24GfLJTax0pa7xmOeEbb > nvt2kGdrKvAl3t4PgwvtwuFmfJoqXzjxWMJJRD2s3hXi0TS4WC1y1pccw+INXKsG > 7sV+dHhqDPwOHpFleHv4RG207Kx6P8+hbNjdeVI8iEelAhKoPfcUJDM/A4aa2ahd > GB+vZrnuInJlZJeg+hL28Xk1pOxwHtq046nhLosVY7YNDW6CHoD5aruWeQdCT1y5 > AFZ/xqOP+XPWMYj/UJLhWoBFTjYjSUZuxi5c4nGpKoK/OSc1GCZERx8Ec7mJrN2R > lzlnW4uBh7M+pvMrhRWl > =rF5K > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays [2] Links: -- [1] https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay [2] 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] Bwauths Measures question, friends.
Bandwidth rate is set to 2MB/s and burst to 4MB/s. The pipe does have such bandwidth capacity, certainly. RelayBandwidthBurst 4194304 RelayBandwidthRate 2097152 On 2014-11-01 10:52, Logforme wrote: > The relay is reported as having "Advertised Bandwidth: 60.55 kB/s" > (about 480 kbits/s): > https://globe-node.herokuapp.com/relay/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 > [2]What does your bandwidth rate values in torrc say? > >> Anyone knows how often bwauths measures a relay? I don't understand why >> directory authorities have not lifted the 20KB cap for my older relay. Now I >> have doubts if it could be a problem with my server. This is a 2MB/s relay >> with burst of 4MB/s to start tuning it and increase it later if stable, >> which is not being used and has been running for over 3 days. Is it normal >> for Relays to take longer than three days to start getting at least some >> traffic and for directory authorities to lift the 20KB cap? Fingerprint >> 48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 >> ___ tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays [1] > > ___ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays [1] Links: -- [1] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays [2] https://globe-node.herokuapp.com/relay/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
[tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends.
Anyone knows how often bwauths measures a relay? I don't understand why directory authorities have not lifted the 20KB cap for my older relay. Now I have doubts if it could be a problem with my server. This is a 2MB/s relay with burst of 4MB/s to start tuning it and increase it later if stable, which is not being used and has been running for over 3 days. Is it normal for Relays to take longer than three days to start getting at least some traffic and for directory authorities to lift the 20KB cap? Fingerprint 48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
[tor-relays] Windows Tor Server Guide
Hello fellows, Where can we contribute (post a guide) to deploy Tor in Windows without the extras unneeded stuff? I was looking for a Tor Server installation guide on Windows to run Tor as a service. I did not wanted to install all the extra browser stuff but a plain "Tor server" service and secure it by giving the service its own limited account and write permissions just to the datadir. Since I couldn't find information online to help me out, I ended up using the latest Tor Browser package and removing everything except Tor itself and deployed it in two Windows servers as services. I would like to post somewhere in the Top project about the process for others to benefit from it. ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
