I have two relays on the same Gb/s connection. I followed the optimization
tips offered in another thread, and think I have things running reasonably
well. What I don't understand is why the Guard flag keeps flapping back and
forth on both relays.
Both relays are showing low BWauth-measured
bandwidth and are below the 2000 threshold
for the Guard flag.
Recently BWauths were offline and the
consensus algorithm reverted to self-
measure. During that period the relays
were above the 2000 threshold and
were assigned Guard.
But even the
Personally, if I had been the person in comment #2, I would have sent all
those logs anyway. Then they would have been compelled to review them. I,
however, am a special kind of evil.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015, 2:33 PM Patrick O'Doherty p...@trickod.com wrote:
noisetor received an identical subpoena,
Thanks for the reply.
I had already run tests with both speedtest-cli and iperf3. This server
consistently achieves 200 to 300 Mb/s in both directions, with both relays
still running, and on some runs is hitting over 800 Mb/s.
The BWauth and self-measured bandwidths make no sense to me. Watching
P.S. Here's some additional data from the server. I just ran these
commands, with the two relays still running.
$ speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Retrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on latency...
Hosted by City of Sandy-SandyNet Fiber
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 08/06/2015 11:29 PM, nusenu wrote:
most hibernating relays with daily quotas start relaying traffic
at 0:00 local time.
https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-manual.html.en
AccountingMax
[...] When the number of bytes is exhausted, Tor
You might start with running SpeedTest
via the Python script to see how the
network performance looks:
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/speedtest-cli/
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
http://boingboing.net/2015/08/04/what-happened-when-the-fbi-sub.html
check out comment #2 as well as the blog article
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
noisetor received an identical subpoena, for what looks to be the same
grand jury appearance in NJ (same date location IIRC).
Unlike the commenter, noisetor keeps zero logs, so we had nothing to
provide.
We did the same as BoingBoing, got our legal counsel and then contacted
the FBI to explain
On 08/06/2015 11:29 PM, nusenu wrote:
most hibernating relays with daily quotas start relaying traffic at
0:00 local time.
https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-manual.html.en
AccountingMax
[...] When the number of bytes is exhausted, Tor will hibernate until
some time in the next accounting
First, I am assuming you are running bare-metal on
a system and not in a virtualized server--everything
below is premised on that. Do not expect a virtual
server or Linux container to perform well as a high-
capacity Tor relay. It's possible to configure a
high-performance VM, but this is an
Ah, forgot to calculate the default TCP
windows for you link speed rather than
mine.
So that's
12500 bytes/sec ( 1 gigabit / sec )
* 25 milliseconds or 3125000 (for read)
* 40 milliseconds or 500 (for write)
net.core.rmem_max = 16777216
net.core.wmem_max = 16777216
comments backward, but the sysctls are correct
* 25 milliseconds or 3125000 (for write)
* 40 milliseconds or 500 (for read)
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
One more errata:
The sense of this is negative, so
the current setting you have is
correct:
net.ipv4.tcp_no_metrics_save = 0
The double-negative got me.
___
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
I had already run tests with both speedtest-cli
and iperf3. This server consistently achieves 200
to 300 Mb/s in both directions, with both relays
still running, and on some runs is hitting over
800 Mb/s.
Final caveats:
If the server is on a shared gigabit link,
performance may not improve. The
Thank you for the thoughtful replies. To clear up a few points:
- This is a dedicated bare-metal server -- not a VPS, VM or container. I
have physical access to the server, router and ONT.
- I would call it a dedicated gigabit link. This is probably up for debate.
The provider's overall capacity
16 matches
Mail list logo
