-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
had to create a new thread because i had digests turned on. oh well.
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014, Thomas White wrote:
> As a community I think we should also be more transparent in
> communications with the ISP's in question. For example, rather than
> sta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I feel we might get marginally better responses if there was an
official @torproject.org mail sending the message as it'll carry more
authority in the eyes of the ISP that what is being said is true.
There have been cases that I've been made aware of w
Perhaps instead of enumerating ISP's one by one the best way to figure
this out could be to partner with someone like the EFF. When the EFF had
the Tor Relay challenge it seemed very successful, perhaps there could
be a "Tor ISP Exit challenge" where the goal is to get as many
independant ISP organ
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:09:50AM +0100, Thomas White wrote:
> Anyone with access to create a new page on the list and we can add
> subsections to a new page containing the dated responses from each
> company on their policy towards Tor hosting.
> On 13/10/2014 01:56, subk...@riseup.net wrote:
> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I fully agree. I proposed a while back to try work on sortable tables
and to make the entire thing table based with factual information and
then have a column for anecdotal comments.
As a community I think we should also be more transparent in
communi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
[cross-posted on tor-talk and tor-relays]
i've found that the Tor GoodBadISPs list [1] is somewhat outdated on
current hosts that allow Tor (exit) relays to be hosted. i'm trying to
find a cheap host that allows exits to be operated from their servi
On 12 Oct 2014, at 19:30 , Tor externet co uk wrote:
> On 2014-10-12 02:04, teor wrote:
>> On 12 Oct 2014, at 09:32 , tor-relays-requ...@lists.torproject.org wrote:
>>> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:25:47 +0100
>>> From: Tor externet co uk
>>> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
>>> Subject: [tor-rel
Thanks, that's what I thought, but wasn't sure.
I'll play around for the next few days to see how fast I can get it
without triggering hibernation.
L
On 2014-10-12 02:04, teor wrote:
On 12 Oct 2014, at 09:32 , tor-relays-requ...@lists.torproject.org
wrote:
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:25:47 +0
On 12 Oct 2014, at 18:06 , tor-relays-requ...@lists.torproject.org wrote:
> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 18:06:42 +1100
> From: Mathew
> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Slow relay speeds for Australian geographic
> location(s)
>
> Thanks for the in depth post, Teor
Sorry about that test.
Thanks for the in depth post, Teor. I had read the lifecycle article but
was concerned when people were posting that their relay was soaking all
their bandwidth after a day or two. This makes sense now, given the
oversupply and location. It was also worrying when the adverti
10 matches
Mail list logo
