On 11/28/2014 11:40 PM, I wrote:
> How many instances could this run?
>
>
> Intel E3-1240 Dedicated Server Special
>
> Server Location: Buffalo USA
> Processor: Intel Xeon E3-1240 V2 3.40 GHz
> HDD: 500GB 7200RPM
> RAM: 16GB DDR3
> Bandwidth: 10TB Monthly Traffic
> IP: /29
> Port Speed: 1Gbit
f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
That hardware is serious overkill for 10 TB/month, as others have
mentioned. That sale price is a great deal, though, and the really
high CPU clock rate will make the latency really low assuming the
network connection is fast.
It might be a good mov
On 11/28/2014 11:50 PM, Tom van der Woerdt wrote:
> 10TB/month is 30Mbit/s. You will have reached those 10TBs long before
> coming close to maxing out a single CPU core. I'd estimate that a single
> E3-1240 CPU core can deliver between 150Mbit/s and 250Mbit/s.
>
> The specs on that server are fine
10TB/month is 30Mbit/s. You will have reached those 10TBs long before
coming close to maxing out a single CPU core. I'd estimate that a single
E3-1240 CPU core can deliver between 150Mbit/s and 250Mbit/s.
The specs on that server are fine, it's just not a lot of bandwidth.
Tom
I schreef op 2
How many instances could this run?
Intel E3-1240 Dedicated Server Special
Server Location: Buffalo USA
Processor: Intel Xeon E3-1240 V2 3.40 GHz
HDD: 500GB 7200RPM
RAM: 16GB DDR3
Bandwidth: 10TB Monthly Traffic
IP: /29
Port Speed: 1Gbit
Price: $119/Month
Sale Price: $59/month
Robert
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 8:39pm, "Libertas" said:
[snip]
> If anyone knows of a good way of finding high-bandwidth budget
> dedicated servers (a search term or a list of providers, for example),
> please share. I expected there to be more of a market for this kind of
> thing than I've found.
They don't seem to be offering a lot of servers right now...
https://clients.rokabear.com/cart.php?gid=3
niklas
On 28/11/2014 02:56, ja...@icetor.is wrote:
Someone may wish to look into Rokubear, I remember them being mentioned
as Tor Exit friendly a few years back.
-Jason
On 11/28/2014 01:54
On 28/11/2014 02:54, Syrup-tan wrote:
Turns out the colocation costs $672/year for the network, and another
$780/year for power, so I don’t think Voxility is very feasible for an
exit node without bargaining with them.
This isn't all that expensive for colo; it's just not on the bargain end
e
sorry was https://www.rokabear.com/ not roku
-Jason
On 11/28/2014 01:56 AM, ja...@icetor.is wrote:
> Someone may wish to look into Rokubear, I remember them being mentioned
> as Tor Exit friendly a few years back.
> -Jason
>
> On 11/28/2014 01:54 AM, Syrup-tan wrote:
>> Turns out the colocation c
Someone may wish to look into Rokubear, I remember them being mentioned
as Tor Exit friendly a few years back.
-Jason
On 11/28/2014 01:54 AM, Syrup-tan wrote:
> Turns out the colocation costs $672/year for the network, and another
> $780/year for power, so I don’t think Voxility is very feasible f
Turns out the colocation costs $672/year for the network, and another $780/year
for power, so I don’t think Voxility is very feasible for an exit node without
bargaining with them.
> If anyone knows of a good way of finding high-bandwidth budget
> dedicated servers (a search term or a list of pr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 11/25/2014 02:29 PM, Syrup-tan wrote:
>
> The colocation isn’t cheap to say the least, and it only gives
> 5TB/month unless we want to pay more per month;
>
This may the largest logistical problem I've encountered when looking
for dedicated ser
On 11/22/14 1:08 AM, SiNA Rabbani wrote:
> Dear Relay Operators,
>
> I noticed there are very few US based exit nodes in the network. And more and
> more
> people are jumping on the same set of AS numbers in Europe.
For who want to taste unusual place Tor Exit: https://www.exoticvps.com/
Send
> On Nov 22, 2014, at 4:21 PM, s7r wrote:
>
> Depending on your budget, Voxility has a datacenter in the US.
> Unfortunately they provide only enterprise class servers with prices
> directly proportional to the class. Maybe we can manage to pool $ in
> order to create a bigger node with this prov
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/24/2014 7:32 PM, Mirimir wrote:
> On 11/24/2014 03:06 AM, s7r wrote:
>> If the only limit is consumed monthly traffic, and not the
>> bandwidth your relays consumes daily (e.g. you use your VPS only
>> for Tor) it is not recommended to use Rel
On 11/24/2014 03:06 AM, s7r wrote:
> If the only limit is consumed monthly traffic, and not the bandwidth
> your relays consumes daily (e.g. you use your VPS only for Tor) it is
> not recommended to use RelayBandwidthRate. Better use AccountingMax,
> and your relay will work at full speed until it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
If the only limit is consumed monthly traffic, and not the bandwidth
your relays consumes daily (e.g. you use your VPS only for Tor) it is
not recommended to use RelayBandwidthRate. Better use AccountingMax,
and your relay will work at full speed unti
On 11/23/2014 11:05 AM, s7r wrote:
> That is, because in almost all cases, providers allow unmetered
> incoming traffic to your server but keep count and accounting on
> outgoing traffic from your server, which is why the torrc setting acts
> the way it does.
That would be great! I'll confirm with
http://blog.censurfridns.dk/en
Pretty sure this is no fon.
On 24 November 2014 at 02:18, Seth wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 16:53:03 -0800, ZEROF wrote:
>
> I'm not using opendns. OpenNic and OpenDNS are not same thing.
>>
>
> I'm aware of the distinction.
>
> What I was trying to point out fo
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 16:53:03 -0800, ZEROF wrote:
I'm not using opendns. OpenNic and OpenDNS are not same thing.
I'm aware of the distinction.
What I was trying to point out for the benefit of people just getting
started with dnscrypt-proxy, is that by default it uses OpenDNS servers.
At
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I'm not using opendns. OpenNic and OpenDNS are not same thing.
On 23 November 2014 at 23:59, Seth wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 19:13:17 -0800, ZEROF wrote:
I saw some info just yesterday, but it's not in actual server
configuration. Can you provid
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 19:13:17 -0800, ZEROF wrote:
I saw some info just yesterday, but it's not in actual server
configuration. Can you provide some good resource for setting
dnscrypt-proxy? And no logging DNS's is good to protect end users
A caveat: You should probably avoid using the default
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 21:48:21 -0800, Chuck Peters wrote:
I'm not a fan of OpenNIC because they were, and probably still are,
running open resolvers. That means the servers are wide open to be used
for reflection attacks, cache poisening and likely numerous other
attacks. And they didn't suppor
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 19:54:09 -0800, teor wrote:
There are 7/12 months that have 31 days, where your 33GB per day will
result in a (potential) 23GB overuse. (And that's not including non-tor
traffic like OS updates.)
Why not use 32GB x 31 days = 992GB, or 31GB x 31 days = 961GB ?
That see
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 19:13:17 -0800, ZEROF wrote:
I saw some info just yesterday, but it's not in actual server
configuration. Can you provide some good resource for setting
dnscrypt-proxy? And no logging DNS's is good to protect end users.
That was a long night bleary night but IIRC I used t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
That is, because in almost all cases, providers allow unmetered
incoming traffic to your server but keep count and accounting on
outgoing traffic from your server, which is why the torrc setting acts
the way it does.
On 11/23/2014 7:58 PM, Seth wrote
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 22:42:15 -0800, Mirimir wrote:
How much throughput do you get with your VPS, 1000 GB/mo or 2000 GB/mo?
The 1000 GB/mo applies to whichever value is greater, input or output. So
far the Tor node is pushing less than 1.5GB per day. Takes a while for
traffic to ramp up ap
On 11/22/2014 06:58 PM, Seth wrote:
> I should have also mentioned in my previous post I put the following in
> /etc/tor/torrc
>
> # Bandwidth and data caps
> AccountingStart day 19:45 # calculate once a day at 7:45pm
> AccountingMax 33 GBytes # 33GB X 30 days = 10GB shy of 1000GB/mo.
> RelayBa
Seth said:
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 18:46:18 -0800, ZEROF wrote:
>
> >I use servernames without logging from this this list
> >http://wiki.opennicproject.org/Tier2 (France).
> Great resource of logless DNS servers, I'm a big fan of OpenNIC.
I'm not a fan of OpenNIC because they were, and probably s
> Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 17:58:37 -0800
> From: Seth
>
...
>
> I should have also mentioned in my previous post I put the following in
> /etc/tor/torrc
>
> # Bandwidth and data caps
> AccountingStart day 19:45 # calculate once a day at 7:45pm
> AccountingMax 33 GBytes # 33GB X 30 days = 10GB
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi Seth,
I saw some info just yesterday, but it's not in actual server
configuration. Can you provide some good resource for setting
dnscrypt-proxy? And no logging DNS's is good to protect end users.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: OpenPG
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 18:46:18 -0800, ZEROF wrote:
I use servernames without logging from this this list
http://wiki.opennicproject.org/Tier2 (France).
Great resource of logless DNS servers, I'm a big fan of OpenNIC.
Have you bothered to encrypt DNS traffic by setting up dnscrypt-proxy or
th
If you are looking for good solution, I'm testing right now
http://roundabove.com, running one exit node with exit rules provided
from https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReducedExitPolicy.
Tor's uptime is 11 days 12:00 hours, with 194 circuits open. I've sent
182.16 GB and received
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 17:05:53 -0800, s7r wrote:
I am concerned if they will sustain Tor exits on the long term. If the
Tor relay will consume more bandwidth they might start shouting about
it since more virtual machines share a network port, and they will
want to maximize how many VMs they can a
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 17:29:35 -0800, Mirimir wrote:
Do you mind if I steal/paraphrase your letter?
That's why I put it up, so others can use it. Knock yourself out.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.
On 11/22/2014 05:56 PM, Seth wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 16:35:18 -0800, I wrote:
>
>> So USA can be fast and cheap but beware when they agree Tor is
>> acceptable because there are poor trade practices laws to get refunds
>> and rights.
>
> FWIW I spun up a Tor exit node on VULTR. I pro-active
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Just checked them now, that is great if they will allow you to run Tor
exit nodes on such cheap virtual machines. 5$ for 1000GB is a good
deal for US traffic, and bitcoin accepted is an important pro. But I
am concerned if they will sustain Tor exits o
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 16:35:18 -0800, I wrote:
So USA can be fast and cheap but beware when they agree Tor is
acceptable because there are poor trade practices laws to get refunds
and rights.
FWIW I spun up a Tor exit node on VULTR. I pro-actively informed them I
was doing so by creating a
I would happily chip in to a node like that.
One thing, though, about USA is their fickleness when shown a legal letter.
I increased VPSs to more than ten paid a year in advance with GreenValueHost
because they were so helpful they even reinstalled Tor and sorted some Linux
problems for me. Then
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I also share the thought that more US exit power is welcomed in the
Tor network.
However, the fact that there is more exit power in the EU compared to
the US has nothing to do with the legal implications of running a Tor
exit, it's as simple as bandwi
On 11/21/2014 07:08 PM, SiNA Rabbani wrote:
Dear Relay Operators,
I noticed there are very few US based exit nodes in the network. And more and
more
people are jumping on the same set of AS numbers in Europe.
[snip]
If anyone is interested in running fast Tor Exit nodes at Rethem Hosting. Fee
Hi SiNA,
On 11/22/2014 01:08 AM, SiNA Rabbani wrote:
> Dear Relay Operators,
>
> I noticed there are very few US based exit nodes in the network. And more and
> more
> people are jumping on the same set of AS numbers in Europe.
[...]
Thank you, SiNA. A reminder to relay operators: Diversity is
42 matches
Mail list logo
