OK then let me summarize.
1. You are running a Pi from Cologne, at 21 mbps (measured) peak, 900
kbps (measured) average utilization by Tor, with 1300 connections.
2. Your Pi is under-utilized, probably limited by your ISP’s peering with
those to which DirAuths are connected. 20% CP
Hi Peter unfortunately your message is empty, it only shows the signature. This
occurs with all signed messages. I have no idea how to solve the problem.Mike
Ursprüngliche Nachricht
Von: Peter Ludikovsky
Datum: 15.12.16 07:22 (GMT+01:00)
An: tor-relays@lists.torprojec
Pls. refer to may answers after each of your questions.
Ursprüngliche Nachricht
Von: Rana
Datum: 15.12.16 07:44 (GMT+01:00)
An: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Betreff: Re: [tor-relays] Tor relay from home - end of experiment?
>Hi There>This is a pretty interestin
>Hi There
>This is a pretty interesting topic. I have been running a Rasp Pi 3 based
>relay since August this year. By now, I am up to about 1,300 incomming and
>outgoing connections, and a max of >about 21mbps. This is about 50% of the
>max. upload speed. Consensus weight is between 3,000 and 6
> One of these shiny pretty Netgear R7900?
Shiny and dangerous:
https://www.wired.com/2016/12/ton-popular-netgear-routers-exposed-no-easy-fix/
Exploiting is as easy as
http://www.routerlogin.net/cgi-bin/;echo$IFS'Vulnerable'
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi ThereThis is a pretty interesting topic. I have been running a Rasp Pi 3
based relay since August this year. By now, I am up to about 1,300 incomming
and outgoing connections, and a max of about 21mbps. This is about 50% of the
max. upload speed. Consensus weight is between 3,000 and 6,
On 14 Dec 2016 14:49, "Rana" wrote:
-Original Message-
From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf
Of Sebastian Niehaus
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 2:43 PM
To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Tor relay from home - end of e
-Original Message-
From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf Of
Sebastian Niehaus
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 2:43 PM
To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Tor relay from home - end of experiment?
Am 14.12.2016 um 11:46 sc
Am 14.12.2016 um 11:46 schrieb Rana:
> They do, however, have different numbers as to how much traffic they can
> carry; which in view of the above IMHO can be attributed only to the
> difference in how well their respective IPSs connect with the ISPs in places
> where DirAuths are located.
W
On 14 December 2016 at 11:42, Andreas Krey wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2016 21:43:28 +, teor wrote:
> ...
> > The bwauth calculations do take latency into account, and they should:
> > if CPU usage or bandwidth are near their limit, the latency through the
> > relay will be high.
>
> I stand corr
> On 14 Dec. 2016, at 22:42, Andreas Krey wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2016 21:43:28 +, teor wrote:
> ...
>> The bwauth calculations do take latency into account, and they should:
>> if CPU usage or bandwidth are near their limit, the latency through the
>> relay will be high.
>
> I stand corr
On Wed, 14 Dec 2016 21:43:28 +, teor wrote:
...
> The bwauth calculations do take latency into account, and they should:
> if CPU usage or bandwidth are near their limit, the latency through the
> relay will be high.
I stand corrected.
I observed my relays (a few years ago) to often run into
On Wed, 14 Dec 2016 12:46:58 +, Rana wrote:
>...
> I beg to differ. My experiment with two identical Pies in the same country
> showed that the alleged volume that the relay can carry IS dependent on how
> well it is connected to the specific DirAuths (which represent "particular
> places in
>Since the consensus weight is the low-median of 5 measurements spread around
>the US and Western Europe, being in Germany only gets you one good
>measurement: you need 3 good measurements >to get a high consensus weight.
>
>From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median :
>
> Because of this, the med
> On 14 Dec. 2016, at 21:46, Rana wrote:
>
> I did see a report from someone boasting the large bandwidth via Pi at home -
> but this seems to be an exception rather than a rule, and he was in Germany,
> probably at a cozy digital distance from the local DirAuth :)
Since the consensus weight
>> A. The fact that the Authorities are located in West Europe and North
>> America does not mean that the USERS are there.
>The question is what volume a relay can carry, and not how well it is
>connected to a particular place in the world.
I beg to differ. My experiment with two identical Pi
>
> On 14 Dec. 2016, at 19:47, Rana wrote:
>
> Why, while GG2's speed as MEASURED by tor and reported in atlas is 153.6
> kbytes/sec, its actual bandwidth utilization is about 0.3 kbytes/sec (=0.2%
> of its capability) is still beyond me, and resolving this by further
> increasing bandwidth d
On Wed, 14 Dec 2016 10:47:12 +, Rana wrote:
> I want to reiterate my opinion that Tor network is "mistreating" home-based
> relays without good reason:
I was just about to jump in and state that it is similar with
lower-bandwidth regular relays, but I checked. I have two relays, one new
Hi,
If you recently added >750 bridges (without malicious intend) or know
anything about it, please read this thread:
[1]
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-project/2016-December/000851.html
and get in contact with them (without disclosing the location of your
bridges to the public).
r
-Original Message-
>From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-boun...@lists.torproject.org] On Behalf Of
>teor
> Your relay's observed bandwidth is
>ZG0: 81.35 KByte/s
>GG2: 170.79 KByte/s
>
> (hover over the
> bandwidth heading in atlas for these details), so its consensus weight
> will be li
20 matches
Mail list logo
