Re: [tor-relays] amount of unmeasured relays continuously rising since 2 weeks

Matt, 135 Kb/s measured, I'm currently pushing data at 40Mbit in/out (limit is 80 Mbit with burst to 120 Mbit). On 21.05.2015 11:14 PM, Speak Freely wrote: Hey NOC, Nah I had the same experience with *1* relay. Following the same pattern, none of the other relays have left 20. I'm now at 162

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

The problem is compounded by the fact each BL company is racing it's way to the bottom, adding each others finds to their own lists. SpamHaus has OVER 1 *BILLION* addresses listed. I lost several relays (11) from OVH because DanTor recorded my relays, then CBL recorded DanTor, then SpamHaus Zen re

Re: [tor-relays] amount of unmeasured relays continuously rising since 2 weeks

Hey NOC, Nah I had the same experience with *1* relay. Following the same pattern, none of the other relays have left 20. I'm now at 16200 and averaging ~30mb/s. 4 still in limbo. What's also interesting is I setup a non-exit and it also will not get past 20. What does arm say your measured spee

Re: [tor-relays] amount of unmeasured relays continuously rising since 2 weeks

After changing my exit node to a regular node it jumped from 20 to 7000 rating. I changed it back to exit and it jumped to 9000 and stayed on that value. This was a few days ago. Right now I've seen an increase to 17000. I assume this is due to the new authorities? I'm glad that my node is bei

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Good point. I should have thought better about phrasing my opinion as labeling the lists as simply shitty might be a bit blindsighted. Listing whole ranges though seems to do more damage than good in most cases, certainly when no proper delisting pol

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

++ 21/05/15 22:35 +0200 - Tim Semeijn: >The lists of SECTOOR might be used wrongly but they sound like they >belong to the ever growing list of 'shitty blacklists'. In my work for In my personal opinion: you are barking at the wrong tree. It's your freedom to create a list of whatever you like wi

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

blaatenator: >> * Port 25 >> * Port 194 >> * Port 465 >> * Port 587 >> * Port 994 >> * Port 6657 >> * Ports 6660-6670 >> * Port 6697 >> * Ports 7000-7005 >> * Port 7070 >> * Ports 8000-8004 >> * Port 9000 >> * Port 9001 >> * Port 9998 >> * Port Were you using the

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I forgot to mention the list of 'shitty blacklists' offers hardly any way to request delisting when the event occurs an IP address gets handed out to a different user. As far as I have seen SECTOOR belongs on this list based on the fact that delistin

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 The lists of SECTOOR might be used wrongly but they sound like they belong to the ever growing list of 'shitty blacklists'. In my work for a hosting company I receive complaints regarding malpractices of such lists on a daily basis. For example there

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

++ 21/05/15 22:04 +0200 - Jurre van Bergen: >I got the same message yesterday, I asked leaseweb to put our exit >node(hviv103) in a "dirty" ip-block and asked sectoor for a >clarification on what happened. No reply to date of any party. This DNSBL has a fairly straightforward listing for an IP-add

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:04:19PM +0200, Jurre van Bergen wrote: > I got the same message yesterday, I asked leaseweb to put our exit > node(hviv103) in a "dirty" ip-block and asked sectoor for a > clarification on what happened. No reply to date of any party. Doesn't sectoor publish two lists, o

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

I got the same. Restricting the exit policy to 80/443 until Sectoor replies. Tom Jurre van Bergen schreef op 21/05/15 om 22:04: Hi, I got the same message yesterday, I asked leaseweb to put our exit node(hviv103) in a "dirty" ip-block and asked sectoor for a clarification on what happened. No

Re: [tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

Hi, I got the same message yesterday, I asked leaseweb to put our exit node(hviv103) in a "dirty" ip-block and asked sectoor for a clarification on what happened. No reply to date of any party. For now, I have shutdown the server. Sorry to hear :( Best, Jurre On 05/21/2015 09:36 PM, blaatenato

[tor-relays] Leaseweb exit relay notice

Hi all, FYI: Yesterday I got the notice below from Leaseweb. I picked them because Leaseweb is mentioned in the Good/Bad ISP post. Apparently a blacklist named SECTOOR added a whole IP block of Leaseweb to block my Exit relay. Since t

Re: [tor-relays] HOWTO: deliver tor-exit-notice_DE.html over ipv6 port 80 too

On 05/21/2015 06:45 PM, Toralf Förster wrote: > nice python ~/ipv6-httpd.py 1>./log 2>&1 Gah - and of course never ever use this crap which just gives a nifty DDoS flank - therefore change this line to : nice python2 ~/ipv6-httpd.py >& /dev/null -- Toralf pgp key: 7B1A 07F4 EC82 0F90 D4C2 893

[tor-relays] HOWTO: deliver tor-exit-notice_DE.html over ipv6 port 80 too

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 B/c ipv6 of Tor implements currently no DirPort I copied+pasted together the following solution to deliver a Tor exit notice over HTTP port of ipv6 too : The python snippet runs under a non-privileged user w/o login shell : $ cat ipv6-httpd.py i

Re: [tor-relays] tor network "loses" ~50 relays/day due to bw auth problem

I thank you, Tom. I lack all of the cited qualifications - now I know. :) Matt Speak Freely ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] [warn] Tried to establish rendezvous on non-OR or non-edge circuit.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 21.05.2015 13:23, Sharif Olorin wrote: >> Any idea ? or its normal ? > > I'm not sure, but I also saw this for the first time today after > enabling ipv6 on a relay last week. A quick look at the relevant > code doesn't shed any immediate light on

[tor-relays] [warn] Tried to establish rendezvous on non-OR or non-edge circuit.

Hi people .. i yesterday started IPV6 but now i see in log following messages periodically part of my torrc below. I only add ipv6 lines. Any idea ? or its normal ? Thanks Cmar ORPort 37.157.192.208:443 ORPort [2a02:2b88:2:1::3a62:1]:9050 ## If you want to listen on a port other than the on

Re: [tor-relays] [warn] Tried to establish rendezvous on non-OR or non-edge circuit.

> Any idea ? or its normal ? I'm not sure, but I also saw this for the first time today after enabling ipv6 on a relay last week. A quick look at the relevant code doesn't shed any immediate light on what would be causing this (the triggering request is to establish a rendezvous point with a hidde