On 21 Jan 2015, at 05:10, eric gisse wrote:
> Holy crap, 40%? And that's been historically acceptable?
I don't think it was historically like that.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailma
Holy crap, 40%? And that's been historically acceptable?
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Sebastian Hahn wrote:
>
> On 20 Jan 2015, at 22:58, Roger Dingledine wrote:
>> We've already known about this in the context of "the bandwidth
>> authority scripts are very poorly tuned for the changes that
On 20 Jan 2015, at 22:58, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> We've already known about this in the context of "the bandwidth
> authority scripts are very poorly tuned for the changes that have
> happened in the Tor network since the scripts were written, so they
> vote wildly varying numbers for relays".
On 20.01.2015 23:38, Network Operations Center wrote:
> Very thorough explanation, thanks. I assume that there is nothing I
> can do except wait until
> a.) a new BWauth script is being introduced
> or b.) hope that a third node rediscovers me and once I have 3 votes
> in the bag I'm back on track.
Very thorough explanation, thanks. I assume that there is nothing I can
do except wait until
a.) a new BWauth script is being introduced
or b.) hope that a third node rediscovers me and once I have 3 votes in
the bag I'm back on track.
What still confuses me is why several nodes were being dro
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 11:44:46AM +0100, Network Operations Center wrote:
> Thank you!
>
> https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/3D7E274A87D9A89AF064C13D1EE4CA1F184F2600
The votes from the directory authorities for the last consensus period
are here:
http://freehaven.net/~arma/moria1-v3-status-v
Am 20.01.2015 um 06:34 schrieb Libertas:
On 01/20/2015 12:04 AM, Malte Ketelsen wrote:
Hi,
I am running a relay about 5-6 weeks.
I have read the 'lifecycle-of-a-new-relay' and I am not over the 86 days,
but I still wonder me, at most, I have only inbound connections.
Sometimes outbound too, but
Hi,
Karsten, thank you very much for your outstanding performance. I never
expected that my wish/ticket would be implemented that fast !
--
Sincerely yours / Sincères salutations / M.f.G.
Sebastian Urbach
-
Religion is fundamentally opposed to
everythi
>> Karsten wrote:
>>> Did you check whether the consensus weight *fraction* also
>>> dropped?
>>
>> Yes, it dropped from 0.193553% to 0.00%
>
> Please post your relay fingerprint(s) here, and I'll investigate this.
These are the fingerprints of the relays I operate:
7C3AE76BB9E9E6E4F2AE9270FD
Thank you!
https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/3D7E274A87D9A89AF064C13D1EE4CA1F184F2600
On 20.01.2015 09:10 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/01/15 21:04, Network Operations Center wrote:
Yes, fraction dropped from 0,2% to 0.72%
Please post
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/01/15 21:54, Bram de Boer wrote:
> Karsten wrote:
>> Did you check whether the consensus weight *fraction* also
>> dropped?
>
> Yes, it dropped from 0.193553% to 0.00%
>
>> If all consensus weights dropped by a certain factor, there's no
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/01/15 21:04, Network Operations Center wrote:
> Yes, fraction dropped from 0,2% to 0.72%
Please post your relay fingerprint(s) here, and I'll investigate this.
All the best,
Karsten
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: G
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi grarpamp,
thanks for the detailed explanation. I just changed MiB/s to Gbit/s.
All the best,
Karsten
On 20/01/15 00:08, grarpamp wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Sebastian Urbach
> wrote:
>> I opened a ticket recently with the intenti
13 matches
Mail list logo
