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 <t...@externet.co.uk> > To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > Subject: [tor-relays] Question on running bridge nodes > Message-ID: <49c1abc0aa88e1bf8425fdc8e4824...@nodataavailable.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > Hi, > > I've set up a bridge node in the previous few weeks, but have had to put > a bandwidth limit on, as I only have 10TB of traffic per month before my > ISP will start throttling me to 100k/sec. > > I wondered whether it was more helpful to the Tor network as a whole to > have have a very fast node which hibernated every 12-15 hours, or if I > throttled Tor traffic, so that the node was more stable. > > I'll confess that I'm far more au fait with the politics of Tor than I > am of the exact ins and outs of how the technology works. Any help would > be gratefully received. > > Thanks > L
For relays, where pathing is quite dynamic, we recommend speed + hibernation over uptime. But for bridges, users obtain only 3 bridge descriptors at a time, usually via some difficult or dangerous method. We'd want to make sure at least 1 stays up at all times (2 for reliability), which would favour throttling. teor pgp 0xABFED1AC hkp://pgp.mit.edu/ https://gist.github.com/teor2345/d033b8ce0a99adbc89c5 http://0bin.net/paste/Mu92kPyphK0bqmbA#Zvt3gzMrSCAwDN6GKsUk7Q8G-eG+Y+BLpe7wtmU66Mx
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
