On 5/8/2010 6:49 PM, John Case wrote:
> I suppose I could see the ratio of actual connections by simply running
> 'netstat', yes ? If my orport and dirport are 9001/9030, and I am
> allowing port 80 exit, then all netstat connections showing port 80 are
> exit connections, so I could (roughly) cal
On Sat, 8 May 2010 22:49:26 + (UTC) John Case
>On Sat, 8 May 2010, Mike Perry wrote:
>
>>> This means that your non-Exit flagged node will be weighted like an
>>> Exit flagged node for the exit position, but will be weighted as if
>>> you were a non-scarce middle or guard node for the oth
Thus spake John Case (c...@sdf.lonestar.org):
> On Sat, 8 May 2010, Mike Perry wrote:
>
> >>This means that your non-Exit flagged node will be weighted like an
> >>Exit flagged node for the exit position, but will be weighted as if
> >>you were a non-scarce middle or guard node for the other posi
On Sat, 8 May 2010, Mike Perry wrote:
This means that your non-Exit flagged node will be weighted like an
Exit flagged node for the exit position, but will be weighted as if
you were a non-scarce middle or guard node for the other positions.
In sort, you would in theory get slightly more total
Thus spake Mike Perry (mikepe...@fscked.org):
> This means that your non-Exit flagged node will be weighted like an
> Exit flagged node for the exit position, but will be weighted as if
> you were a non-scarce middle or guard node for the other positions.
>
> In sort, you would in theory get slig
Thus spake John Case (c...@sdf.lonestar.org):
> So I am indeed an exit...
>
> >>This is totally incorrect. Tor uses exit nodes in the middle and possibly
> >>even guard position, depending on flags and general scarcity of
> >>guards.
>
> Ok, that was the answer to my first question. My follow-u
> No, you misread the original - I am saying that I first have this exit
> policy:
>
> reject *:*
>
> and then I replace that exit policy with:
>
> accept *:80,reject *:*
>
> So I am indeed an exit...
Yup, I did misread it. Sorry! Back to lurking now... :)
***
On Sat, 8 May 2010, Dyno Tor wrote:
Let's say you run a tor relay with no exit policy:
reject *:*
And then later you alter that exit policy a bit:
accept *:80,reject *:*
(snip)
What do you mean, not an exit node at all? As long as the Tor
process receives a HUP signal or is restarted t
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Sebastian Hahn wrote:
>
> On May 8, 2010, at 7:54 PM, Dyno Tor wrote:
>
>> On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:03 AM, John Case wrote:
>>>
>>> Let's say you run a tor relay with no exit policy:
>>>
>>> reject *:*
>>>
>>> And then later you alter that exit policy a bit:
>>>
>>
On May 8, 2010, at 7:54 PM, Dyno Tor wrote:
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:03 AM, John Case
wrote:
Let's say you run a tor relay with no exit policy:
reject *:*
And then later you alter that exit policy a bit:
accept *:80,reject *:*
My understanding is that this system will continue to be use
Thus spake M (maill...@piirakka.com):
> >> I've been wondering this for a long time. How do you keep your exit node
> >> running without interference from ISP / local police etc.? Especially
> >> when it's the largest exit node.
> >
> > Do a 'whois' for Olaf's IP range... ;)
> Okay, that cleared
> From: j...@pps.jussieu.fr
> To: or-talk@freehaven.net
> Subject: Re: Polipo question
> Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 18:08:22 +0200
>
> > does anyone know if there is a config file option to turn off all
> > caching in Polipo?
>
> If you look at the Polipo manual, there's an index. If you look at
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:03 AM, John Case wrote:
>
> Let's say you run a tor relay with no exit policy:
>
> reject *:*
>
> And then later you alter that exit policy a bit:
>
> accept *:80,reject *:*
>
> My understanding is that this system will continue to be used as a non-exit
> relay, but will t
> does anyone know if there is a config file option to turn off all
> caching in Polipo?
If you look at the Polipo manual, there's an index. If you look at the
index, there's an entry for "uncachable". If you follow the entry,
you'll find the config variable "uncachableFile".
--jch
**
Let's say you run a tor relay with no exit policy:
reject *:*
And then later you alter that exit policy a bit:
accept *:80,reject *:*
My understanding is that this system will continue to be used as a
non-exit relay, but will then also be used as an exit. That is, it's not
going to be mono
On Sat, May 08, 2010 at 01:57:02PM +0300, maill...@piirakka.com wrote 1.2K
bytes in 44 lines about:
: Okay, that cleared things a lot. I Guess that authorities treats that
: ip-range as an ISP.
:
: Last week I was in contact with my ISP and it is possible to have your
: companys etc. information
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Timo Schoeler wrote:
> M wrote:
>> Hello
>
>> I've been wondering this for a long time. How do you keep your exit node
>> running without interference from ISP / local police etc.? Especially
>> when it's the largest exit node.
>
> Do a 'whois' for
17 matches
Mail list logo