On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:03:57 +
Farid Joubbi wrote:
> Intel NUC5CPYH Celeron N3050 1,6 GHz to 2,16 burst -> 5 Mbit/s max (OpenBSD)
This sounds wrong. VIA Nano 1.6GHz, a single core laptop CPU from 2011, can
sustain about 40+40 Mbit (WITHOUT utilizing the crypto acceleration).
I do mean Megabits.
I have learned a long time ago that Tor traffic throughput can't be compared
with ssh.
Tor needs to sustain the traffic amount for a long period of time with many
variables affecting the measured bandwidth.
Also I would prefer to run OpenBSD, which does not have support for
On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:03:57 +, Farid Joubbi wrote:
> I have tried a Banana Pi Pro 1,2 GHz Allwinner A20 -> 10 Mbit/s max (debian)
You do mean Mbit/s and not Mbyte/s? Even my old raspi B (first gen)
needs only 30% CPU to process 12MBit/s (ssh), and my bananas transfer
data via scp at 6
On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 22:27:59 +, Olaf Grimm wrote:
...
> My personal usage drives the internet line to full power, but Tor as my
> MIDDLE RELAY doesn't use the full internet line power.
Which is a good thing, by the way. Tor traffic is bursty, so when your
tor node actually saturating the link
More is better. Here my values at home:
Intel N3050 4x 1.6 GHz in an internal firewall with external Tor
application. Internet connection download 50 MBit/s, Upload 10 MBit/s.
Internal LAN performance: 90 MBit/s
My own downloads are near 50 MBit/s (less time, most time 20...30MBit/s);
Uploads
Agreed you won't need much to max out a 100 Mbps connection.
I have a few relays in the ~ 200 Mbps ballpark running on single core VPS
instances. The underlying hardware is based on Intel Xeon E5-2650L.
CPUs with AES-NI help. 2 cores may offer marginal improvement. More than 2
cores isn't
I have tried a Banana Pi Pro 1,2 GHz Allwinner A20 -> 10 Mbit/s max (debian)
Beaglebone Black 1 GHz AM335x -> 12 Mbit/s max (debian)
Intel NUC5CPYH Celeron N3050 1,6 GHz to 2,16 burst -> 5 Mbit/s max (OpenBSD)
So I need something quite a bit more than I have already tried ;-)
Even a 1,8 ghz Atom can max out a 100mbit line … you don't need much …
niftybunny
ab...@to-surf-and-protect.net
Where ignorance is bliss, 'Tis folly to be wise.
Thomas Gray
> On 20 Mar 2017, at 21:45, Farid Joubbi wrote:
>
> I'm a little surprised that this kind of question
I'm a little surprised that this kind of question is not documented anywhere,
or at least I have not been able to find it.
I have only found others asking the same question as me without getting a good
answer.
There was a quite exhaustive discussion seven years ago:
Hi Weston,
thanks for adding an exit relay.
Please do not forget to set/update the MyFamily parameter in your torrc
configuration to tell clients your relays belong to a single operator,
otherwise they might use your relays in multiple positions within a
circuit, which is rather bad for their
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017, at 01:44 PM, teor wrote:
> >> Mar 19 11:52:37.000 [notice] Tried for 32496 seconds to get a connection
> >> to [scrubbed]:80. Giving up.
>
> We fixed a bug like this in 0.2.9.6-rc.
>
> It was caused by DNS resolves that received no reply and didn't timeout.
> (DNS
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017, at 01:44 PM, teor wrote:
>
> > On 21 Mar 2017, at 00:09, Geoff Down wrote:
> >
> > More information:
> > Mar 20 10:48:23.000 [warn] Your system clock just jumped 38788 seconds
> > forward; assuming established circuits no longer work.
> >> Mar 19
> On 21 Mar 2017, at 00:09, Geoff Down wrote:
>
> More information:
> Mar 20 10:48:23.000 [warn] Your system clock just jumped 38788 seconds
> forward; assuming established circuits no longer work.
> This is starting to seem familiar: I searched the archives but nothing
More information:
Mar 20 10:48:23.000 [warn] Your system clock just jumped 38788 seconds
forward; assuming established circuits no longer work.
This is starting to seem familiar: I searched the archives but nothing
recent. NTP seems fine. If no-one has any better ideas I'll go back a
version.
On
14 matches
Mail list logo