Re: [tor-relays] Exit relay funding

[Greg Moss]

I'll kick in a few month also...
On Mar 8, 2016 5:26 PM, "Michael McConville"  wrote:

> elrippo wrote:
> > I will also chip in with some funding.
> >
> > DO you accept Bitcoin or Monero, i do not like to you use PayPal for
> > funding an TOR relay ;D
> >
> > If so, please post the addresses, so we can fund a fast running relay.
>
> Definitely: 1KjWtgsrSRJ6mBMjAuKhqSGvEPVJ8rRoqV
>
> > Also tell again, how much it costs you per month.
>
> $35/month.
>
> Thanks so much! I'm impressed by and grateful for everyone's generosity.
>
> Michael
> ___
> 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

Re: [tor-relays] Hibernation Expectations

[Michael McConville]

Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
> If you're very close to your bandwidth cutoff, why not decrease it
> slightly, and run all the time?

I've always settled on this solution when in that situation. Hibernation
can sometimes work in unexpected ways, get interfered with by unexpected
outages, etc. IME, it's far simpler and more reliable to have an
always-on relay.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Exit relay funding

[Michael McConville]

elrippo wrote:
> I will also chip in with some funding.
> 
> DO you accept Bitcoin or Monero, i do not like to you use PayPal for
> funding an TOR relay ;D
> 
> If so, please post the addresses, so we can fund a fast running relay.

Definitely: 1KjWtgsrSRJ6mBMjAuKhqSGvEPVJ8rRoqV

> Also tell again, how much it costs you per month.

$35/month.

Thanks so much! I'm impressed by and grateful for everyone's generosity.

Michael
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Ticket #18489

[Tim Wilson-Brown - teor]

> On 9 Mar 2016, at 07:17, Roger Dingledine  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 09:07:07PM +0100, Felix wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> I stumbled over [1]. As I operate Doedel26 I checked
>> DownloadExtraInfo was default. After change in torrc to 1 and reload
>> 'cached-extrainfo' showed up in /var/db/tor/.
>> 
>> Can someone please advice how to deal with it ?
>> 
>> Best regards, Felix
>> 
>> [1] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18489
> 
> I think the answer is you, the relay operator, shouldn't have to do
> anything.

Indeed!
Thanks for reporting this issue.
We released a list of fallback directories in 0.2.8.1-alpha to find issues like 
this.

> My guess is that it's a bug in somebody's expectation for how to
> implement the fallbackdirectory design. The fix might be something
> like "teach clients who are trying to fetch extrainfo descs to not
> ask relays who don't offer them".

Yes, that would be the plan.
The code that picks authorities and fallback directories uses the same 
function, so it looks like there are some missing flag checks.
(We plan on unifying the code that picks authorities / fallback directories and 
the code that picks directory mirrors. If we'd managed that in 0.2.8, then 
these checks would be correct, because they're being performed for directory 
mirrors.)

> Once some devs, especially teor, recover from the Valencia meeting,
> I expect this one will be easy to resolve.

I am still in an airport, and I believe others are still on post-dev-meeting 
leave.
Give us a week or so to look into it.
We should be able to get a fix in the next alpha.

Tim

Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP 968F094B

teor at blah dot im
OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F



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

Re: [tor-relays] Exit relay funding

[renke brausse]

Hi Roman,

> Sorry but reading these kinds of things is kind of demoralizing. --

I kind of understand your sentiment but

> Oh I know mine are not Exit relays, so those are not special enough, nothing
> to see here, move along.

this is (at least for me) not true - Michael's mail was the first I
remember with a plea for support and currently it's easier for me to
donate money* instead of running my own relay.

Unfair? Maybe. But not the fault of the thread starter and I'm sorry if
it felt as if I do not appreciate other relay operators.

Renke

*) on top of my more silent donations to other organisations around data
privacy



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Running 5000 relays...

[nusenu]

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 relays might significantly increase the overall churn rate, which
means that some tor users have to change guard relays more often than
currently (if your relays are around long enough to become guards)
-> consider "recycling" your keys as long as they stay in the same AS
to a certain extend (even if instances are "never coming back")

- maybe proactively announce it here before adding >50 relays/day


Looking forward to the first of your relays.
(also because it will practically answers interesting questions like how
big is to big according to dir auth ops)






signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Exit relay funding

[Roman Mamedov]

On Tue, 08 Mar 2016 20:17:44 +0100
elrippo  wrote:

> I will also chip in with some funding.
> DO you accept Bitcoin or Monero, i do not like to you use PayPal for funding 
> an TOR relay ;D
> If so, please post the addresses, so we can fund a fast running relay.
> Also tell again, how much it costs you per month.
> 
> If you guys agree, the funding can be done monthwise by individuals or via 
> crowdfunding, i am fine with both.

Sorry but reading these kinds of things is kind of demoralizing. --

I'm not going to do a "me too" post, but some of us pay for relays with their
own funds for years, which easily do 30-40 MB/sec combined, receiving zero
donations -- then some guy with a 3 MB/sec relay comes around and people jump
at the chance to send him hundreds of Euros just because.

Oh I know mine are not Exit relays, so those are not special enough, nothing
to see here, move along.

-- 
With respect,
Roman


pgpJdE7_i4XMc.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Ticket #18489

[Roger Dingledine]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 09:07:07PM +0100, Felix wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I stumbled over [1]. As I operate Doedel26 I checked
> DownloadExtraInfo was default. After change in torrc to 1 and reload
> 'cached-extrainfo' showed up in /var/db/tor/.
> 
> Can someone please advice how to deal with it ?
> 
> Best regards, Felix
> 
> [1] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18489

I think the answer is you, the relay operator, shouldn't have to do
anything.

My guess is that it's a bug in somebody's expectation for how to
implement the fallbackdirectory design. The fix might be something
like "teach clients who are trying to fetch extrainfo descs to not
ask relays who don't offer them".

Once some devs, especially teor, recover from the Valencia meeting,
I expect this one will be easy to resolve.

--Roger

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

[tor-relays] Ticket #18489

[Felix]

Hi

I stumbled over [1]. As I operate Doedel26 I checked DownloadExtraInfo 
was default. After change in torrc to 1 and reload 'cached-extrainfo' 
showed up in /var/db/tor/.


Can someone please advice how to deal with it ?

Best regards, Felix

[1] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18489
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] relay maintenance without losing consensus weight?

[Random Tor Node Operator]

On 08.03.2016 19:30, Volker Mink wrote:
> You can take it down for some days without losing any flags or consensus 
> weight. 
> Had it with my exit i have at home. 
> I had to reinstall it and i have the same stats as before. 

The HSDir flag will be cleared after each restart of the Tor daemon, and
be set again after a certain amount of uptime.

The consensus weight doesn't change significantly due to short
maintenance outages.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] relay maintenance without losing consensus weight?

[Volker Mink]

You can take it down for some days without losing any flags or consensus 
weight. 
Had it with my exit i have at home. 
I had to reinstall it and i have the same stats as before. 

Best regards,
Volker



> Am 08.03.2016 um 19:26 schrieb Michael McConville :
> 
> Zwiebel wrote:
>> Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
 Zwiebel wrote:
 is there a way to shut down Tor relays for a short time without
 losing consensus weight or bandwidth?
>>> 
>>> This is a frequently asked question, particularly if you add "losing
>>> flags" to the relay operator's list of concerns.
>> 
>> So... is it possible?
> 
> I don't think that short maintenance outages should significantly impact
> consensus weight. Bandwidth takes a little while to ramp back up because
> people need to build circuits through your relay again.
> 
> Anyway, if you need to do maintenance, don't wait. The network benefits
> more from a secure, reliable relay with 5% less consensus weight.  :-)
> ___
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

[tor-relays] Hibernation Expectations

[stealth]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I am allocating 100gb of bandwidth up and down every day. When my
middle relay goes into hibernation, should I expect my stats to go
to hell? Should I also expect my flags my stable and guard flags to
be removed?

If I reach my bandwidth restrictions 10 hours before it is reset,
is this the reason why the relay would lose guard and stable flags?
I may need to restrict my bandwidth to 60gb up and down as I only
have 3tb of bandwidth to donate on a monthly basis.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32)
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=zOMH
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] relay maintenance without losing consensus weight?

[Zwiebel]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 11:20:09PM +0800, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote:
> 
> > On 8 Mar 2016, at 22:37, Zwiebel  wrote:
> > 
> > Hello,
> > is there a way to shut down Tor relays for a short time without losing
> > consensus weight or bandwidth?
> 
> This is a frequently asked question, particularly if you add "losing flags" 
> to the relay operator's list of concerns.

So... is it possible?
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] Exit relay funding

[Michael McConville]

re...@mobtm.com wrote:
> > Sadly, I have to shut it down at least temporarily if no one can help me
> > pay for it. Is anyone interested? You can search the mailing lists to
> > see that I've been contributing for a few years, and I can give more
> > verification if you'd like.
> 
> if you're willing to give me a paypal address (or banking account
> infos if you're within the European SEPA zone) I will chip in three
> months.

Awesome, thanks!  :-)  My Paypal address is mmcconvi...@mykolab.com.

> Thanks for running a fast relay!

My pleasure - thanks for making it possible.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Re: [tor-relays] relay maintenance without losing consensus weight?

[Tim Wilson-Brown - teor]

> On 8 Mar 2016, at 22:37, Zwiebel  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> is there a way to shut down Tor relays for a short time without losing
> consensus weight or bandwidth?

This is a frequently asked question, particularly if you add "losing flags" to 
the relay operator's list of concerns.

I wonder if it's worth adding a FAQ or wiki entry with potential answers:

It takes time:
* wait, and the authorities and bandwidth authorities will re-assess your relay 
over about a week;
* clients may have given up on you as a guard, and may not come back for 
several months;

The network is dynamic:
* if the network is growing, your relay's share is going to be lower over time;
* if the network is not using its full relay capacity, this is good, because 
packets travel faster;
* (it's also good because sudden increases can be absorbed without impacting 
existing users);

We make bug fixes and add features:
* we recently fixed a bug where a relay would submit a descriptor with an 0 
DirPort when it restarted (0.2.7.7 [unreleased], 0.2.8.1-alpha);
* in 0.2.8, network load is moved from the authorities to fallback directory 
mirrors, please opt-in if your relay is stable;
* in 0.2.8, network load is moved from directory mirrors with DirPorts, to 
almost all relays via tunnelled directory connections.
Depending on your relay's role in the network, it might see more or less 
traffic with these changes.

> Last week I installed a newer Tor version and added more RAM and now my
> relays lost a third of their bandwidth. Last time I've upgraded the
> hardware was in January and the relays didn't fully recover from the downtime
> in the last two months. I'd gladly provide 200Mb/s+ of relay bandwidth if I
> could, but Tor won't let me.

Networks need extra capacity - it increases average speeds, and absorbs sudden 
usage spikes.
Consider starting a second tor instance on other ports to use the extra 
capacity on your server.

Tim

Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP 968F094B

teor at blah dot im
OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F



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