On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 10:35:56AM +0200, Olaf Selke wrote:
Yes, my directory authorities are using way too much ram too. It appears
that we introduced something bad in 0.1.2.x that wasn't present in
0.1.1.x.
today I noticed that according the FAQ tor needs 768 MB ram each 10 Mbps
Hi !
Roger Dingledine wrote:
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 10:35:56AM +0200, Olaf Selke wrote:
Yes, my directory authorities are using way too much ram too. It appears
that we introduced something bad in 0.1.2.x that wasn't present in
0.1.1.x.
today I noticed that according the FAQ tor needs 768
Rip Rock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So http://torcheck.xenobite.eu/ verifies that my TOR setup really is
working, and it shows IPs and machine names that have nothing to do with
my real IP and machine name. That much is great. However, when I try
surfing to .onion URLs, I get 503 or 404
Rip Rock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/22/07, Roger Dingledine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the problem might be a lack of bandwidth.
No, the problem is that your ports aren't reachable.
Okay, the problem is my ports. And because my logs had lacked the error
messages
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 15:30 +0200, Benedikt Boss wrote:
Hej all,
im going to attend this years Chaos Communication Camp held near
Berlin/Germany and was wondering
who of you is going there too. Maybe we can held a meeting there or
simply meet.
If you dont know what im
Just to toss some more numbers into the fray. Tor 1.2.14
I'm looking at about 62 MB resident, with 120 open connections (both
incoming and outgoing, from lsof and wc -l.). Actual bandwidth is
about 30KB/s, maximum advertised is supposed to be 20, but Vidalia
reports that it's 33 KB/s.
I'm on a
Why doesn't the EFF implement an option like 'no_exit_cp=YES' for
server configurations that would allow people to block child
pornography? I wish to run a tor exit node but, having been molested
as a child, will not do so until such a feature exists.
you can't run a completely open
Roger Dingledine wrote:
You might try downgrading to 0.1.1.26 briefly, and see how it compares
to the current situation.
I'll give it a try, too. But where to download version 0.1.1.26?
regards, Olaf
* Olaf Selke schrieb am 2007-07-22 um 21:26 Uhr:
I'll give it a try, too. But where to download version 0.1.1.26?
http://tor.eff.org/dist/tor-0.1.1.26.tar.gz
Besten Gruß
--
Jens Kubieziel http://www.kubieziel.de
Ich arbeite nach dem Prinzip, dass man niemals
On Sunday 22 July 2007 05:58:23 Ron Wireman wrote:
Unfortunately, this 'separation of concerns' you're a proponent of doesn't
work in the real world. In the same way that you can't insert a piece of
metal into someone with a high calibre rifle without grievously injuring
then, you can't run a
On Sun, 2007-22-07 at 13:57 -0700, Michael_google gmail_Gersten wrote:
Short version: If I knew how to build a version of Tor that could be
used only for Good and never for Evil, I surely would. But I have no
idea how to do that well, and I don't think anybody else does either.
(There are
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Ben Wilhelm wrote:
I'd love to keep it running, but when it's singlehandedly chewing up more
than half of my system's RAM, it just isn't going to happen. Any suggestions
on this? Are there config options I can tweak to make it a little less
RAM-hungry, or is it just
Thus spake Roger Dingledine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 10:35:56AM +0200, Olaf Selke wrote:
Yes, my directory authorities are using way too much ram too. It appears
that we introduced something bad in 0.1.2.x that wasn't present in
0.1.1.x.
today I noticed that
On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 12:14:20AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 0.7K bytes in
13 lines about:
I've created a Flyspray entry for this apparent bug.
http://bugs.noreply.org/flyspray/index.php?do=detailsid=468
Please post the relevant details to the flyspray entry.
We're looking for details to
14 matches
Mail list logo
