-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Holstein wrote:
(snip)
> Yeah, but the "standard" store-bought WRT54G (ver 6) is only 8mb.
(snip)
v5+ sucks! I was actually talking with a friend the other day about the
issue... and we agreed that we'd rather buy a v4 or lower used, than to
b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Holstein wrote:
(snip)
>> all behind a Linksys Firewall Router.
>
> This will be a problem. Cheap-o routers don't have enough memory to
> manage huge state tables. You'd be better off getting a second NIC card
> for the PC and just using the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Scott Bennett wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:31:43 +0100 Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 10:44:17PM -0800, algenon flower wrote:
>>
(snip)
>>
>>>behind a Linksys Firewall Router.
>> Make sure this is not y
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
algenon flower wrote:
> Hello TOR developers, experienced users
> I am planning on getting my TOR server up again using new hardware. If
> any of these things won't work well with a TOR server, plz let me know.
> Because of difficulty in the past w
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 10:37:48AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 0.9K bytes in
27 lines about:
: I've been running a server (phrenograph) on a Comcast connection in
: the Washington, DC, area for a few months now, and I haven't heard
: anything from Comcast about it.
Right. They most likely
Are you sure OpenWRT on a Linksys can't handle the states with 32 MBytes RAM,
and a 0.2..0.5 MBit/s upstream?
Yeah, but the "standard" store-bought WRT54G (ver 6) is only 8mb.
Linksys uses Linux (Vxworks for its more braindead types of routers which
I know nothing about), but the default
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:20:17 +0100 Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 09:34:36AM -0600, Scott Bennett wrote:
>
>> Thank you. You just brought forward the thing that has been eluding
>> my recollection since this thread started. Linksys routers do not have
>>
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 09:34:36AM -0600, Scott Bennett wrote:
> Thank you. You just brought forward the thing that has been eluding
> my recollection since this thread started. Linksys routers do not have
> enough memory for the NAT table to run a tor exit server, and they do not
Are you
I've been running a server (phrenograph) on a Comcast connection in
the Washington, DC, area for a few months now, and I haven't heard
anything from Comcast about it.
I guess I should have been more clear .. I ran the tor node on an
academic network, and we have our own ASN, so there's no
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 10:37:48 -0500 Jay Goodman Tamboli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Dec 14, 2007, at 10:09:28, Michael Holstein wrote:
>
>>> all behind a Linksys Firewall Router.
>>
>> This will be a problem. Cheap-o routers don't have enough memory to
>> manage huge state tables.
>
>I ha
On Dec 14, 2007, at 10:09:28, Michael Holstein wrote:
all behind a Linksys Firewall Router.
This will be a problem. Cheap-o routers don't have enough memory to
manage huge state tables.
I haven't noticed any such problems with an Apple Airport Extreme
router.
My service provider wil
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 10:09:28 -0500 Michael Holstein
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> P4 processor @ 3GHZ, Intel MB, 2GB DDR2 RAM, 80 GB SATA HD
>
>This will be fine (more than fine, actually) .. I had no issues running
>a ~10mbit (symmetric) node on an old P3/1ghz with 1gb RAM (it was FreeBSD).
P4 processor @ 3GHZ, Intel MB, 2GB DDR2 RAM, 80 GB SATA HD
This will be fine (more than fine, actually) .. I had no issues running
a ~10mbit (symmetric) node on an old P3/1ghz with 1gb RAM (it was FreeBSD).
all behind a Linksys Firewall Router.
This will be a problem. Cheap-o routers d
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 10:44:17PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 2.8K bytes in
29 lines about:
: P4 processor @ 3GHZ, Intel MB, 2GB DDR2 RAM, 80 GB SATA HD, all behind a
Linksys Firewall Router.
In my practical experience, amd athlon64/opterons seem to handle tor
with far less percent cpu tha
On Dec 13, 2007 9:33 AM, Scott Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 06:38:02 -0800 (PST) "Eric H. Jung"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >--- Scott Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> The providers in the U.S. are not at the forefront, obviously. Unlike
> >> F
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 06:38:02 -0800 (PST) "Eric H. Jung"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>--- Scott Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The providers in the U.S. are not at the forefront, obviously. Unlike
>> France, Japan, etc., an intermediate-speed, asymmetric model is used for
>> resid
--- Scott Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The providers in the U.S. are not at the forefront, obviously. Unlike
> France, Japan, etc., an intermediate-speed, asymmetric model is used for
> residential service in the U.S. If you have, say, $1200/month to blow, you
> can get a T3 line a
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:31:43 +0100 Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 10:44:17PM -0800, algenon flower wrote:
>
>> Because of difficulty in the past when I was using minimum hardware
>>specs, I now will be setting up my TOR server on a dedicated machine
>
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 10:44:17PM -0800, algenon flower wrote:
> Because of difficulty in the past when I was using minimum hardware
>specs, I now will be setting up my TOR server on a dedicated machine
>with this physical architecture:
> P4 processor @ 3GHZ, Intel MB, 2GB DDR2
Hello TOR developers, experienced users
I am planning on getting my TOR server up again using new hardware. If any of
these things won't work well with a TOR server, plz let me know.
Because of difficulty in the past when I was using minimum hardware specs, I
now will be setting up my TOR s
20 matches
Mail list logo
