Hello everyone, thanks for replying. I did some further checks as you suggested. In the meantime I removed MaxAdvertisedBandwidth since the default should do.
I pinned the ExitNode in my Client and downloaded an Ubuntu image. Download was between 800 kbyte/s and 1 Mbyte/s. Not great - but not bad. When I start a wget on the machine directly it will be downloaded with 30 Mbyte/s. So I do not assume we are limited by the provider. I checked and changed the ulimit. Unfortunately no better results so far. I did not yet set up an local resolver - does it make such a difference ? We use the provides DNS and 8.8.8.8. Finally a set logfiles to debug and started greping for err: Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 617: end cell (misc error) for stream 7289. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 356: end cell (misc error) for stream 42558. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 491: end cell (misc error) for stream 36878. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:50.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 177: end cell (misc error) for stream 60286. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 374: end cell (misc error) for stream 60283. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): end cell (misc error) dropped, unknown stream. Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 174: end cell (misc error) for stream 60289. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 384: end cell (misc error) for stream 60288. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 590: end cell (misc error) for stream 60285. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 587: end cell (misc error) for stream 60284. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 338: end cell (misc error) for stream 32126. Removing stream. Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [debug] {NET} tor_tls_read(): read returned r=-1, err=-2 Dec 15 22:55:51.000 [info] {EDGE} connection_edge_process_relay_cell(): 676: end cell (misc error) for stream 60290. Removing stream. I get very much of these. It does not look healthy to me. Is this normal ? Again many thanks for your help. best regards Dirk On 14.12.2015 00:06, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote: > >> On 14 Dec 2015, at 07:18, Dirk Eschbach <tor-relay.d...@o.banes.ch >> <mailto:tor-relay.d...@o.banes.ch>> wrote: > ... >> The big question now is: >> Why do the machines do not have more throughput ? >> Is the reason for this the way the distribution through the Tor network >> works. >> Moritz hinted it might have to do with the way the tor "bandwidth >> scanners" measure the ability of a server to handle traffic. > > No, this is not the issue, your relay's own self-measured throughput > is the issue. See below. > >> Can you explain me / point me to documentation where this process is >> described and how this can be optimized. >> What are the criteria for tor exit node server traffic distribution ? > > By consensus weight, which is determined by the bandwidth authorities. > https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay > https://stem.torproject.org/tutorials/examples/votes_by_bandwidth_authorities.html > >> How do the clients choose the exit ? > > From those servers they believe exit to the address and port they > want, randomly, weighted by the server's consensus weight. > > The details of bandwidth weight selection are in section 3.4.2 of the > Directory Specification: > https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt > > "The bandwidth in a "w" line should be taken as the best estimate > of the router's actual capacity that the authority has. For now, > this should be the lesser of the observed bandwidth and bandwidth > rate limit from the server descriptor. It is given in kilobytes > per second, and capped at some arbitrary value (currently 10 MB/s). > > The Measured= keyword on a "w" line vote is currently computed > by multiplying the previous published consensus bandwidth by the > ratio of the measured average node stream capacity to the network > average. If 3 or more authorities provide a Measured= keyword for > a router, the authorities produce a consensus containing a "w" > Bandwidth= keyword equal to the median of the Measured= votes." > > When I look at the bandwidth authority votes for DigiGesTor1e1, they say: > w Bandwidth=9586 Measured=24200 > w Bandwidth=9586 Measured=15900 > w Bandwidth=9586 Measured=43500 > w Bandwidth=9586 Measured=19700 > w Bandwidth=9586 Measured=19200 > > Those votes are in these large files: > http://171.25.193.9:443/tor/status-vote/current/authority > http://199.254.238.53/tor/status-vote/current/authority > http://131.188.40.189/tor/status-vote/current/authority > http://128.31.0.34:9131/tor/status-vote/current/authority > http://154.35.175.225/tor/status-vote/current/authority > > So the bandwidth authorities have having no trouble measuring your > relay, they think it should be 2x - 4x as fast. > Your relay itself has't observed itself sustaining that performance > over a 10-second interval, so it won't allow the directory authorities > to assign it more bandwidth. > > Section 2.1.1 of the Directory Specification: > > ""bandwidth" bandwidth-avg bandwidth-burst bandwidth-observed NL > > [Exactly once] > > Estimated bandwidth for this router, in bytes per second. The > "average" bandwidth is the volume per second that the OR is > willing to > sustain over long periods; the "burst" bandwidth is the volume that > the OR is willing to sustain in very short intervals. The > "observed" > value is an estimate of the capacity this relay can handle. The > relay remembers the max bandwidth sustained output over any ten > second period in the past day, and another sustained input. The > "observed" value is the lesser of these two numbers." > > Please improve the throughput your relay can sustain over a 10-second > period. > Try some performance tuning steps, testing your relay with Tor client > after each one. > (See below.) > > Have you set a limit on MaxAdvertisedBandwidth in the torrc files? > >> Konsole output >> top - 09:57:49 up 16 days, 11:57, 1 user, load average: 1.14, 0.91, >> 0.81 >> Tasks:244 total, 3 running,241 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie >> %Cpu0 :12.5 us, 3.4 sy, 0.0 ni,79.7 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 4.4 si, 0.0 st >> %Cpu1 :15.9 us, 5.4 sy, 0.0 ni,74.3 id, 0.3 wa, 0.0 hi, 4.1 si, 0.0 st >> %Cpu2 :14.3 us, 2.7 sy, 0.0 ni,77.0 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 6.0 si, 0.0 st >> %Cpu3 : 9.5 us, 3.4 sy, 0.0 ni,80.3 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 6.8 si, 0.0 st >> KiB Mem: 3877624 total, 2739880 used, 1137744 free, 1288 buffers >> KiB Swap: 4026364 total, 364264 used, 3662100 free. 10752 cached Mem >> >> Looking at the network connection it is without any problem possible to >> start big downloads without reducing TOR throughput. > > Have you tried doing a large download through your exit via a Tor > client and seeing how fast that is? > ExitNodes <fingerprint od your exit> > StrictNodes 1 > >> The servers are connected with 1 Gbit/s each. > > It looks like your Tor processes are neither CPU nor network-bound. > > Does your network connection drop packets or have large latency? > > How many file descriptors are the tor processes allowed to open? > How many connections does each tor process have open at once? > (There should be thousands per process on a busy relay.) > > https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/tree/doc/TUNING > > Are there any performance-related messages in the Tor logs? > > Is your hardware / kernel / firewall / etc. capable of handling many > connections? > > Does your provider rate-limit any kinds of traffic? > Does your provider limit the number of open connections? > > Is your DNS resolver keeping up with the requests? > Do you have a local caching DNS resolver on each machine? > > Tim > > Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) > > teor2345 at gmail dot com > PGP 968F094B > > teor at blah dot im > OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F > > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays