Re: [tor-relays] Script to get top relays, AS and countries weights

On 7/26/12 4:50 PM, Moritz Bartl wrote: > On 26.07.2012 16:39, delber wrote: >> Compass is fine by me. Although, you have to admit that it does not say >> more than `tor-relay-stats`. I agree that Compass does not say more than tor-relay-stats. But it's a name, and once you know about it, it's mu

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

>> 4) What exactly do we mean by diversity? > > I would look at this almost entirely from a jurisdictional and ISP level. I > believe the biggest "sudden impact" threats to the tor network are going to > be from legal changes (jurisdictional, i.e. "save the children, nullroute > the nodes") and lo

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 02:36:32AM +, k...@damnfbi.tk wrote: > Hey all, > Has anyone contemplated pitching this towards hackerspaces running > their own fast nodes? I wouldn't recommend running an exit node on a network link that will make you sad if it goes away for a few days. Most hackersp

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

Excuse me, as I'm rather new to mailing lists an the sort, but I've been tailing the conversation on and off the last few days. I'm currently using Secured Servers through PheonixNAP as my dedicated provider. I've used them for roughly a year now and have had no real problems. They are located

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

> 1) What exactly would we pay for? > > Agree on 100+ mbps exit node funding. Also agree with Moritz's suggestion that there be a form that limits fund disbursement on a per-ISP level, to encourage ISP diversity (and contribute to the discovery of new "known good" ISPs for tor). *Continued* fundi

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

Andreas Fink: > On 26.07.2012, at 19:52, Andrew Lewman wrote: > >> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 16:05:53 + >> k...@damnfbi.tk wrote: >>> We should probably talk further then since I'm _in_ Iceland atm and >>> would also like to see a high capacity node here. >>> May I ask for your reasoning though? A

Re: [tor-relays] Electronic surveillance on major tor exits

On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 18:57 +0100, mick wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 11:03:24 -1000 > Name Withheld allegedly wrote: > > > Most Tor users probably don't read the manual and follow best > > practices. I'm sure we've all seen traffic where users are using > > google maps to find directions from

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 20:08:05 +0200 Andreas Fink wrote: > Traffic from Iceland is still relatively expensive. However we could > host some machines in other places where we interconnect on internet > exchanges. Is this true for IPv6 too? I've found asking for IPv6-only servers is almost free, be

Re: [tor-relays] Electronic surveillance on major tor exits

I meant "we" as in "our nodes." I can guarantee any node you run (of size) sees that kind of traffic run through it. If you think it doesn't, I suspect you'll change your mind after spending 30 seconds on IRC talking to an average user. On 7/26/2012 7:57 AM, mick wrote: On Mon, 23 Jul 2

Re: [tor-relays] Electronic surveillance on major tor exits

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:47 PM, mick wrote: > He specifically used the word "traffic". That does not imply shoulder > surfing. I think the original messages point was simply: ``we all know that some people don't use Tor properly." I doubt he is actually sniffing traffic on his relay (or looking

Re: [tor-relays] Negative impact of MaxOnionsPending 250?

* Moritz Bartl wrote: > What is the negative impact of setting MaxOnionsPending to 250? > Should we instead reduce the bandwidth as suggested in the warning? I run several low/medium bandwidth relays and so far (~6 weeks) haven't observed any negative effects with MaxOnionsPending set to 250.

Re: [tor-relays] Electronic surveillance on major tor exits

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:30:02 -0400 (EDT) "Steve Snyder" allegedly wrote: > I took "seen" to mean looking over someone's shoulder as they used > Tor, not sniffing their traffic. He specifically used the word "traffic". That does not imply shoulder surfing. ---

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On 26.07.2012, at 19:52, Andrew Lewman wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 16:05:53 + > k...@damnfbi.tk wrote: >> We should probably talk further then since I'm _in_ Iceland atm and >> would also like to see a high capacity node here. >> May I ask for your reasoning though? A lot of people on both

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 14:58:54 -0400 Roger Dingledine allegedly wrote: > The result though is a direct tradeoff > with relay diversity: on today's network, clients choose one of the > fastest 5 exit relays around 25-30% of the time, and 80% of their > choices come from a pool of 40-50 relays. > htt

Re: [tor-relays] Electronic surveillance on major tor exits

On Thursday, July 26, 2012 1:57pm, "mick" said: > ___ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 11:03:24 -1000 > Name Withheld allegedly wrote: >

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 07:05:41 -0400 Mike allegedly wrote: > in closing, don't discredit the cheaper solutions. They do work just > fine and you don't need a pocket of money to throw at something. > Telling the provider what you plan on doing and educating them works > wonders as well. It has for m

Re: [tor-relays] Electronic surveillance on major tor exits

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 11:03:24 -1000 Name Withheld allegedly wrote: > Most Tor users probably don't read the manual and follow best > practices. I'm sure we've all seen traffic where users are using > google maps to find directions from their home, or logging into their > true-name mail accounts

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 16:05:53 + k...@damnfbi.tk wrote: > We should probably talk further then since I'm _in_ Iceland atm and > would also like to see a high capacity node here. > May I ask for your reasoning though? A lot of people on both sides of > the pond have believed that IMMI

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

Roger Dingledine: > - Should we prefer big collectives like torservers, noisetor, CCC, > dfri.se, and riseup (which can get great bulk rates on bandwidth and are > big enough to have relationships with local lawyers and ISPs), or should > we prefer individuals since they maximize our operator diver

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On 26.07.2012 18:05, k...@damnfbi.tk wrote: > Hi Moritz, > We should probably talk further then since I'm _in_ Iceland atm and > would also like to see a high capacity node here. > May I ask for your reasoning though? Country/legal diversity. > Have you tried talking to DataCell? No, I have not

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 12:01:13 -0400 (EDT) "Steve Snyder" allegedly wrote: > Is there any justification for a low-bandwidth Tor node? And if so, > what is the practical minimum bandwidth needed to actually see any > traffic? Yes. I run one. And have run two (or three at one time). I currently run

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

Hi Moritz, We should probably talk further then since I'm _in_ Iceland atm and would also like to see a high capacity node here. May I ask for your reasoning though? A lot of people on both sides of the pond have believed that IMMI has been passed here alrea

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

Roger Dingledine arma at mit.edu Mon Jul 23 18:58:54 UTC 2012 [snip] >At the same time, much of our performance improvement comes from better >load balancing -- that is, concentrating traffic on the relays that can >handle it better. The result though is a direct tradeoff with relay >diversity: on

[tor-relays] Negative impact of MaxOnionsPending 250?

Hi, We sometimes see "Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation requests!" on our servers. Scott Bennett suggested to set MaxOnionsPending to 250 instead of the default of 100, which at least makes the warnings disappear. [1] I am thinking about modifying out torrc template w

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On 26.07.2012 16:14, Moritz Bartl wrote: > That said, we should discuss and come up with a good organizational > structure to reimburse people. Personally, I would only sponsor 100 > Mbit/s or more (or maybe even only Gbit). To make this more explicit: I opt to have 13 organizations/people runnin

Re: [tor-relays] Script to get top relays, AS and countries weights

On 26.07.2012 16:39, delber wrote: > Compass is fine by me. Although, you have to admit that it does not say > more than `tor-relay-stats`. I opt for tor-relay-stats. I don't believe a helper script needs a made up name that doesn't say anything :) -- Moritz Bartl https://www.torservers.net/ ___

Re: [tor-relays] Script to get top relays, AS and countries weights

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 04:31:48PM +0200, Karsten Loesing wrote: > I made a couple more changes to the script. We could clean up the code > a bit and improve the documentation, but I consider the script pretty > much feature-complete now. Yay! :) I have used it a bit. This is simply brilliant. :

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

Hi, What can I say that hasn't been said by others before... :) We are in contact with reliable ISPs with endpoints in various countries. They would be willing to cooperate on exits at these locations. We have not yet talked about prices. I would say we (as in Torservers.net) are in the position

Re: [tor-relays] High speed Relays/Exit nodes

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote: > Dennis Ljungmark: > > Hi, > > We're currently running 6 different 100-200Mbit relay/guard nodes, and > > are looking at some issues moving on towards high performant exit nodes. > > > > There are some administrative issues ( needing ano

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

Just throwing my 2 cents in, we're running loki on a decade old dell pe1950 p3 (32bit) w/ 2GB of ram. We average about 5.2 Mbps of traffic. That said I'm looking forward to seeing what increases a 64 c

Re: [tor-relays] High speed Relays/Exit nodes

> Dennis Ljungmark: >> Hi, >> We're currently running 6 different 100-200Mbit relay/guard nodes, and >> are looking at some issues moving on towards high performant exit nodes. >> >> There are some administrative issues ( needing another IP block due to >> the RIPE registration, our ISP doesn't

Re: [tor-relays] High speed Relays/Exit nodes

Dennis Ljungmark: > Hi, > We're currently running 6 different 100-200Mbit relay/guard nodes, and > are looking at some issues moving on towards high performant exit nodes. > > There are some administrative issues ( needing another IP block due to > the RIPE registration, our ISP doesn't want t

[tor-relays] High speed Relays/Exit nodes

Hi, We're currently running 6 different 100-200Mbit relay/guard nodes, and are looking at some issues moving on towards high performant exit nodes. There are some administrative issues ( needing another IP block due to the RIPE registration, our ISP doesn't want their name on the exit nodes th

Re: [tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:48:16PM -0700, Sriakhil Gogineni wrote: > Ball park quotes we got were 99$ / 100 Mbps or $599 / 1000 Mbps for transit > for a single 1U... we'll see if we can get something better... That's a good quote for 1Gbps. > Would this be helpful / viable option for a Tor exit n

[tor-relays] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

Hello! I saw this posted on slashdot and think this is an excellent way to donate some of our time and expertise, especially considering Internet access has been declared a human right by the UN. We currently colocate with a provider and will be inquiring with them if they are OK with hosting Tor