> On 22 Mar 2016, at 08:14, Toralf Förster wrote:
>
> Signed PGP part
> Tim Wilson-Brown - teor:
> > * if the AccountingRule is not "in".
> Ah,
> AccountingRule in
> was meant. I did not set that config option in the past due to the impact of
> network-in-attacks as is seen in [1].
>
> B
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Tim Wilson-Brown - teor:
> * if the AccountingRule is not "in".
Ah,
AccountingRule in
was meant. I did not set that config option in the past due to the impact of
network-in-attacks as is seen in [1].
Because I do have to pay just for outg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Tim Wilson-Brown - teor:
> * if the AccountingRule is not "in".
Thx for the explanation - the above I do not understood - may I ask what "in"
means in detail ?
- --
Toralf
PGP: C4EACDDE 0076E94E, OTR: 420E74C8 30246EE7
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE
> On 22 Mar 2016, at 04:22, Toralf Förster wrote:
>
> Signed PGP part
> Tim Wilson-Brown - teor:
> > In 0.2.8, every relay is potentially a hidden service directory and
> > a directory mirror.
> But with this configuration :
>
> # 20 TB/month: echo "20 * 1024^4 / 31 / 24 / 60 / 60 / 1024^2" | b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Tim Wilson-Brown - teor:
> In 0.2.8, every relay is potentially a hidden service directory and
> a directory mirror.
But with this configuration :
# 20 TB/month: echo "20 * 1024^4 / 31 / 24 / 60 / 60 / 1024^2" | bc
# == 8017
#
#BandwidthRate 8 MB
> On 21 Mar 2016, at 21:32, tor-server-crea...@use.startmail.com wrote:
>
> By setting "DirPort: 0" the relays wont get flaged as Dir. So: Should be set
> to 0 in this case, no?
In 0.2.8, every relay is potentially a hidden service directory and a directory
mirror.
Clients tunnel directory con
By setting "DirPort: 0" the relays wont get flaged as Dir. So: Should
be set to 0 in this case, no?
Am Sonntag, 20. März 2016 02:54 schrieb Tim Wilson-Brown - teor
:
On 9 Mar 2016, at 09:29, nusenu wrote:
- maybe run without DirPort so you do not become HSDir for to many
HSes
Hmm
> On 9 Mar 2016, at 09:29, nusenu wrote:
>
> - maybe run without DirPort so you do not become HSDir for to many HSes
Hmm, I don't think that this will work as you expect.
As of 0.2.7, every relay advertises that it will be a hidden service directory
(regardless of whether it has a DirPort or n
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:51:23AM +, nusenu wrote:
> > This sounds like a great effort. I wanted to point out 2 things:
> > 1) I think that GCE IP addresses are blacklisted (due to an earlier sybil
> > attack,
> > https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2015-August/007656.html).
>
>
Brian,
That's all quite interesting. Thanks for sharing. I hope this work
goes well. It would help move Tor forward toward the cloud-based
software model that's becoming more and more popular.
Greg
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Brian 'redbeard' Harrington
wrote:
> Greg,
>
> Thank *you* for th
Greg,
Thank *you* for the reminder!
So as far as the GCE note, that's good to know. I'll put a note in some of the
documentation about this.
In terms of it's relation to cloud.torproject.org... In a way this pre-dates
that, in a way it's new artwork.
Many moons ago (~circa 2007) I was discu
On Mar 11, 2016 3:51 AM, "nusenu" wrote:
>
> > This sounds like a great effort. I wanted to point out 2 things:
> > 1) I think that GCE IP addresses are blacklisted (due to an earlier
sybil
> > attack,
> >
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2015-August/007656.html).
>
> I don't thin
> This sounds like a great effort. I wanted to point out 2 things:
> 1) I think that GCE IP addresses are blacklisted (due to an earlier sybil
> attack,
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2015-August/007656.html).
I don't think it is blacklisted currently (but maybe someone at the
Brian,
This sounds like a great effort. I wanted to point out 2 things:
1) I think that GCE IP addresses are blacklisted (due to an earlier sybil
attack,
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2015-August/007656.html).
2) How do you see your work relating to and differing from the discon
> Since there isn't really a "good" way to do the families I'll settle for
> consistent ContactInfo.
Worst-case outcome for a "how do I do MyFamily properly" discussion ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-relays mailing l
Perfect. I'll poke at this a bit more and then notify folks on tor-relays and
release the hounds. Since there isn't really a "good" way to do the families
I'll settle for consistent ContactInfo. Likely I'll have some of the
configuration done so that users may set an environment variable to e
A few more thoughts
- consider asking dir auths at what cw fraction they are going to start
de-listing relays - to avoid wasting efforts
(if you are lucky and get an answer from most of them share them with us :)
- maybe run without DirPort so you do not become HSDir for to many HSes
- your rela
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 03/06/2016 05:21 AM, nusenu wrote:
> Moritz wrote:
>> Maybe this is better taken to tor-relays.
> Ok.
>
> url to the tor-dev thread:
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-March/010473.html
>
> Brian didn't say anything about pla
Moritz wrote:
> Maybe this is better taken to tor-relays.
Ok.
url to the tor-dev thread:
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/2016-March/010473.html
Brian didn't say anything about planed deployment locations, but if
_all_ relays are within a single /16 network you might skip MyFamily
19 matches
Mail list logo
