Re: [tor-relays] publish current AuthDirMaxServersPerAddr limit?

> On 12. Feb 2023, at 11:46, nusenu wrote: > > Hi, > > would it be possible to publish > the currently enforced value of AuthDirMaxServersPerAddr > on some tpo website? Maybe consensus-health.tpo? > > kind regards, > nusenu Hi nusenu, that's a bit hard to do automatically, as the value is

Re: [tor-relays] Relay MIGHTYWANG consensus issues and loss of STABLE flag

Hi Wang, > On 29. Oct 2021, at 18:10, Mighty Wang wrote: > > I have one pretty large relay, MIGHTYWANG which is an IP4/6 guard, dedicated > hardware running on a 1Gb line uncontended. It is usually one of the top 5 > relays by consensus weight but on the morning of 14th October it lost Guard

Re: [tor-relays] Questions about consensus votes

Hi Tobias, thanks for running a relay! > On 20. Apr 2021, at 15:21, Tobias Höller wrote: > > I have only recently started operating relays > (Family:008196DC449482C73CFA9712445223917F760921) and have some trouble with > reliably getting the "Fast" and "HSDir" flags for my relays. Right now

Re: [tor-relays] Fallback Directories - Upcoming Change

Hi, > On 8. Apr 2021, at 14:50, David Goulet wrote: > On 07 Apr (21:43:50), Toralf Förster wrote: >> On 4/7/21 9:04 PM, David Goulet wrote: >>> Over time, we will remove or add more relays at each minor release if the >>> set >>> of fallback directories not working reaches a 25% threshold or

Re: [tor-relays] Wildly Different BandWidth Numbers

> On 2. Feb 2021, at 22:46, Eddie wrote: > > Looking at the consensus health page for my relay > D195E5CE8AE77BAC91673E6CFB7BD0AF57281646), I see wildly different values for > bandwidth: > > bw=3060 > bw=910 > bw=340 > bw=620 > bw=5130 > > Why is there such a discrepancy. I'm guessing

Re: [tor-relays] Guard flag got removed after only 48 hours of downtime.

o from 97.95% to 97.96%.. >> >> ..thats slow. >> >> Also, thanks for the correct site, I randomly searched >> "consensus-health" and just used the first site.. dumb mistake on my >> end. >> >> Thank you and have a great weekend everyone. &g

Re: [tor-relays] Guard flag got removed after only 48 hours of downtime.

> On 5. Aug 2020, at 17:25, William Kane wrote: > > Strange, it's still missing the Guard flag after 8 days of consecutive > uptime - maybe I'm just being impatient? > > Weirdly enough, the relay is also missing on > https://utternoncesense.com/consensus-health.html. > > Every other relay

Re: [tor-relays] Heartbeat: It seems like we are not in the cached consensus.

Hi there, > On 28. Jul 2020, at 22:33, Fran wrote: > > thanks @Torix for the IPv6 suggestion, all auth were reachable via v6, but > for testing I turned of IPv6 in the tor config - no change. I can indeed ping both of your IPv4 and IPv6 from gabelmoo right now, but this is potentially a

Re: [tor-relays] Guard flag got removed after only 48 hours of downtime.

Hi William, > On 29. Jul 2020, at 00:45, Matt Traudt wrote: > > The Guard flag conditions are > https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt#n2640 > > Given you're Fast and Stable, and have a good advertised bandwidth and > weight, then I suspect you simply no longer have a

Re: [tor-relays] Why does my relay often appears offline in Metrics and should I be worry?

Hi there, > On 19. Apr 2020, at 02:25, Roger Dingledine wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 10:16:34AM +0200, Clément Février wrote: >> The issue is back. After more than 3 days, the relay appears offline. >> All flags are gone in nyx. There is a bug. > > I believe there is something wrong with

Re: [tor-relays] Question about authority clock skew

Hi Luiz, > On 13. Apr 2020, at 15:41, torjoy > wrote: > I was browsing the "Consensus health" page and something let me curious... > What is the importance of the clock skew in the authorities with the > resolution of microseconds? > Brasília).png> >

Re: [tor-relays] Consensus Weight Dropping/Authority Issues?

Hi all, > On 16. Mar 2020, at 07:43, teor wrote: >> On 7 Jan 2020, at 22:57, John Ricketts wrote: >> >> I have been watching the consensus weight and bandwidth of all of my 50 exit >> nodes drop consistently over the past few months. I have not made any >> hardware changes in my data center

Re: [tor-relays] Operator straw poll: Reasons why you use Tor LTS versions?

> On 7. Sep 2019, at 12:20, teor wrote: > > Hi, > > On 6 Sep 2019, at 20:14, Roman Mamedov wrote: > >>> Where does the security weakpoint risk come from? Does >>> apt-transport-tor/onion service repository availability help in your >>> mind here? >> >> As with adding any third-party

Re: [tor-relays] Problem with MyFamily config (doesn't work correctly)

> On 13. May 2018, at 18:01, Olaf Grimm wrote: > > Dear Tor controllers, > > > For some time now I have relays in different locations and with > different systems. > All relays have the same torrc, except nickname. > The following list shows the excerpt from

Re: [tor-relays] No stable flag from 6 out of 9?

Hi, > On 15. Apr 2018, at 20:20, Ole Rydahl wrote: > It's my experience that announcing ipv6 capability and actually not > providing - results in not being part of the cached consensus since only 3 > authorities acknowledge your relay as running. > > My situation was

Re: [tor-relays] No stable flag from 6 out of 9?

> On 15. Apr 2018, at 10:03, Ole Rydahl wrote: > As far as I can see, there is a quite large difference in the required > "running" period between the 9 directory authorities. I interpreted that as > an issue with my setup. 3 authorities voted stable after a few days, while

Re: [tor-relays] No stable flag from 6 out of 9?

> On 31. Mar 2018, at 14:45, Ole Rydahl wrote: > Disabled IPv6 some hours ago (nyx/menu/reset tor) with no change on the moods > of 6 of the muses. They still don't consider me "stable". The respective dirauths aren't muses, they simply function as they are designed - they

Re: [tor-relays] hourly CPU spike at :02

> On 17. Mar 2018, at 11:05, Toralf Förster wrote: > > caused by both of the 2 Tor exits here at a Linux server. > > I do wonder what both processes do exactly 2 minutaes past each hour for > about half a minute? Maybe consensus diff calculation? signature.asc

Re: [tor-relays] gabelmoo's BW scanner, temporary or permanent leave?

> On 19. Feb 2018, at 22:38, starlight.201...@binnacle.cx wrote: > > noticed gablemoo's BW scanner is offline and the entry for it at > > https://consensus-health.torproject.org/#bwauthstatus > > was removed; is it gone or just taking an extended break? It is broken because the current

Re: [tor-relays] Publishing bridge contact information

Hi there, I don't want to declare it a showstopper outright, but: > On 8. Feb 2018, at 09:42, Karsten Loesing wrote: > > These sound like variants of the first disadvantage listed above. There > are two additional assumptions in here, though: > > 1) bridge operators

Re: [tor-relays] Publishing bridge contact information

> On 7. Feb 2018, at 18:55, Geoff Down wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018, at 4:45 PM, Karsten Loesing wrote: > >> Possible disadvantages are: >> - If somebody runs a relay and a bridge, both with the same contact >> information, a censoring adversary might guess that

Re: [tor-relays] >30% of the Tor network runs outdated version: Consider enabling auto-updates

> On 14. Jan 2018, at 10:56, Ralph Seichter wrote: > > On 12.01.2018 17:05, nusenu wrote: > >> The motivation for this is that there are a lot of relays (>3000) >> running outdated tor releases. > > This reminds me that I wanted to ask about package updates: > > I

Re: [tor-relays] MyFamily and ContactInfo fields are required for operators running multiple tor instances

> On 11. Jan 2018, at 20:44, Dmitrii Tcvetkov wrote: > >>>MyFamily **must** be set correctly if you run more than one >>> relay or bridge. (That is, every relay should list all the others >>> as described above.) > > So if I run some relays and also some bridges I

Re: [tor-relays] restarting tor service after AccountingMax has been reached

> On 20. Dec 2017, at 22:46, Fabian A. Santiago > wrote: >>> so how i first noticed was when i couldn't browse to my dirport readme html >>> page after a tor >>> restart. are you saying when it normally hibernates, that page goes down >>> too? >> >> Yes. >> >>

Re: [tor-relays] exit relay

> On 14. Dec 2017, at 23:04, Evangelos Meintasis > wrote: > > Hello to all, > I got this warning : > [warn] Tor is running as an exit relay. If you did not want this behavior, > please set the ExitRelay option to 0. > > But in /etc/tor/torrc file, I can not

Re: [tor-relays] Atlas is now Relay Search!

> On 14. Nov 2017, at 19:26, teor <teor2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On 15 Nov 2017, at 05:05, Sebastian Hahn <m...@sebastianhahn.net> wrote: >> >> Hey, >> >>> On 14. Nov 2017, at 19:00, teor <teor2...@gmail.com> wrote: >>

Re: [tor-relays] Atlas is now Relay Search!

Hey, > On 14. Nov 2017, at 19:00, teor wrote: > On 15 Nov 2017, at 02:41, Iain R. Learmonth wrote: > >>> On 14/11/17 15:35, Ralph Seichter wrote: >>> On 14.11.17 13:52, Iain R. Learmonth wrote: >>> I also notice that the "new look" does not work in

Re: [tor-relays] Testers needed for Nyx beta release

> On 31. Oct 2017, at 00:19, Damian Johnson wrote: > >> I think I've found a bug with the Connections pane. nyx appears to munge all >> the connections into "outbound", like: >> >> Connections (4852 outbound, 1 control): >> >> Whereas arm on the same system displays

Re: [tor-relays] Thank you to directory operators

Hi there, > On 30. Oct 2017, at 22:12, Paul Templeton wrote: > > Here Here > > From: "Tor Node Admin @ SechsNullDrei.org" > To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 9:58:49 PM > Subject: [tor-relays] Thank you to

Re: [tor-relays] spurios warning about using the nickname instead of the key

Hi there, > On 12. Oct 2017, at 20:43, Scott Bennett wrote: > teor wrote: >>> On 12 Oct 2017, at 13:21, Toralf F?rster wrote: >>> >>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >>> Hash: SHA256 >>> On 10/11/2017 10:08 AM, Dylan Issa

Re: [tor-relays] Some Dir Authorities blocked

Hi there, > On 17. Sep 2017, at 01:19, Graeme Neilson wrote: > > I am running a relay but 4 out of 8 directory authorities appear to being > blocked by my ISP. > There is no route to the blocked authorities and the last responding tcp > traceroute hop is an ISP machine.

Re: [tor-relays] Another relay is using the same name as mine.

Hi Alan, > On 11. Jun 2017, at 21:22, Alan wrote: > I just need some advice. I'm running 3 relays, one is called Andromeda. > Today I find out there is another relay called Andromeda. > > https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/Andromeda > mine is running from ip

Re: [tor-relays] Faravahar acting up again / "Bad Gateway" while uploading descriptor

> On 05 Jan 2017, at 23:26, Toralf Förster <toralf.foers...@gmx.de> wrote: > Signed PGP part > On 01/05/2017 10:40 PM, Sebastian Hahn wrote: > > They send notifications within 10 > > minutes of the beginning of the hour. > So, if the issue happens at the 11th m

Re: [tor-relays] Faravahar acting up again / "Bad Gateway" while uploading descriptor

> On 05 Jan 2017, at 22:29, anondroid wrote: > > I just set up a handful of new relays, and all of them have something like > the following in their logs: > > [WARN] http status 502 ("Bad Gateway") reason unexpected while uploading > descriptor to server

Re: [tor-relays] How can we trust the guards?

> On 02 Jan 2017, at 07:28, Rana wrote: > I think I already covered the "if it exists" part. Sticking to the original > (old) design doc of Tor is not a practically useful strategy. I believe that > Tor has MOSTLY such strong adversaries, the others do not matter much.

Re: [tor-relays] "Graceful" Restart of Tor-Relay ?

> On 30 Dec 2016, at 19:26, mistral.re...@posteo.net wrote: > > Hello all, a newbie question: > > assuming that I want to shut down and restart a running tor-relay (for > whatever reason; e.g. a linux reboot is required) - is it fine to just shut > down the relay or is there a nicer, more

Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP

Hi there, I am one of the directory authority operators, so while I don't claim to know what the collective community wants, I am one of the people who are asked to make these decisions. > On 22 Dec 2016, at 10:25, Rana wrote: > > So my question to the community is as

Re: [tor-relays] Exit Node Geographical Location

> On 09 Dec 2016, at 09:34, teor wrote: > > >> On 8 Dec. 2016, at 22:08, Sec INT wrote: >> >> US just has alot of people trying to exit there - so its always busy > > Tor clients choose exits at random, based on the ports the exit allows. > They *do

Re: [tor-relays] Accounting and the 'Stable' flag

> On 21 Aug 2016, at 13:11, Ralph Seichter wrote: > > Hello list, > > I have enabled daily accounting on a non-exit Tor relay some days ago. > On the first day, the transfer threshold was reached and the relay > entered hibernation for a few hours, as expected. On

Re: [tor-relays] Bridge Authority closure

> On 21 Jul 2016, at 05:20, Me wrote: > So what are we going to do when Green shuts down the Bridge Authority server > next month? Will it have a serious effect, or will there be any apparent > issues or slowdowns? We'll have to act before that. We're currently

Re: [tor-relays] what's up(down) with gablemoo?

> On 21 Jan 2016, at 19:10, starlight.201...@binnacle.cx wrote: > > At 18:55 1/21/2016 +0100, you wrote: >> Gabelmoo is running 0.2.7.6. . . > > Thank you for replying. > > I saw earlier that moria1 ran into this > and decided to wait on 0.2.7 for my > relay, though I suppose the issue is >

Re: [tor-relays] what's up(down) with gablemoo?

> On 21 Jan 2016, at 18:23, starlight.201...@binnacle.cx wrote: > > Lately 'gabelmoo' had been bouncing down and up like a ping-pong ball. > > Because gabelmoo is a BWauth (of which only five exist) as well as a normal > authority, the impact is greater than if it did not participate in

Re: [tor-relays] Opt-In Trial: Fallback Directory Mirrors

Hi there, > On 17 Dec 2015, at 15:07, Nick Mathewson wrote: > In December 2015, we created a list of ~400 candidate fallbacks. > https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/attachment/ticket/15775/fallback_dirs.inc > > If your relay is on this list, and you expect it to be on

Re: [tor-relays] Tor relays without AESNI

Hi, > On 16 Sep 2015, at 05:22, nobody wrote: > Hi all, > > I am looking at renting a dedicated server on a unmetered 100 Mbit/s > connection, but the CPU is a Intel G850, which is old (Q2 2011) and does > not have AES-NI. Will this CPU be too slow to make use of the

Re: [tor-relays] Notice

Hi Bandie, On 08 Apr 2015, at 00:22, Bandie Kojote ban...@ttygap.net wrote: Dear list admins, I didn't subscribe to the tor-relay mailing list to receive spam. Please do something against this. Maybe mark this list _with a big sign_ that the people know, that this is for operators only, or

Re: [tor-relays] Consensus weight dropped

On 21 Jan 2015, at 05:10, eric gisse jowr...@gmail.com wrote: Holy crap, 40%? And that's been historically acceptable? I don't think it was historically like that. ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org

Re: [tor-relays] Consensus weight dropped

Hey there, On 19 Jan 2015, at 10:03, eric gisse jowr...@gmail.com wrote: This is roughly consistent with what I've been seeing on my own node. Weird. On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Bram de Boer list-tor-rel...@nosur.com wrote: Update: generation of the http://nosur.com/consensus.txt

Re: [tor-relays] exit policy to reflect country-wide ban

Hi Pascal, On 04 Dec 2014, at 19:16, Pascal pascal...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: Microdescriptors (Tor 0.2.3.x) broke the inclusion of specific IPs in exit policies (exit enclaving). Did they break the exclusion of specific IPs in exit policies as well? No, that's a local choice by the

Re: [tor-relays] exit policy to reflect country-wide ban

Hi Pascal, On 05 Dec 2014, at 04:26, Pascal pascal...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: On 12/4/2014 3:50 PM, Sebastian Hahn wrote: No, that's a local choice by the relay and it will prevent exiting to IPs that it disallows in its config. Yes, but does it have a way of telling clients that so

Re: [tor-relays] Estimating the value and cost of the Tor network

On 25 Sep 2014, at 09:21, Mike Perry mikepe...@torproject.org wrote: I really need identity fingerprints to see how much traffic your node is actually pushing, what its consensus weight is, when and how often it is hibernating, if it is otherwise strangely rate limited, etc. All nonexits

Re: [tor-relays] Port-Based Best-Fit Circuit Selection

On 20 Sep 2014, at 03:26, Jeremy Olexa jol...@jolexa.net wrote: Hijack thread: So what is the advice to get a relay used more? Currently my relay won't even get close to the AccountingMax (4TB/mo) even though the BandwidthRate is set high enough (3MB/s). It seems like the network considers

Re: [tor-relays] request at Hetzner

On 11 Sep 2014, at 21:20, Toralf Förster toralf.foers...@gmx.de wrote: Did you already look at Server4You? oops, not now, wiki discouraged me at the first glance - will check I have the worst possible expierences with that company and hosting servers there. Would not recommend it at all. This

Re: [tor-relays] Time information

Hi, On 02 Sep 2014, at 21:19, Marcin Gondek drix...@e-utp.net wrote: I just looking on the logs and see: ==cut== Sep 02 21:03:54.000 [info] channel_tls_process_netinfo_cell(): Received NETINFO cell with skewed time from server at x.x.x.x:443. It seems that our clock is behind by 1

Re: [tor-relays] Dynamic IP

Hi Tim, Sebastien, I run a relay on a machine that has an internal private IP, behind a NAT router with a public IP. In my experience, I need to specify the NAT router's public IP in the torrc, otherwise tor doesn't include it in the router descriptor it submits to the consensus. This

Re: [tor-relays] Dynamic IP

Hi Tim, On 16 Aug 2014, at 23:53, Tim t_e...@icloud.com wrote: I'm running a relay on a similarly dynamic IP. If the line goes down, I'm reallocated a new one. But otherwise the IP is stable. If I don't notice the change, I notice the traffic drop, then I update the torrc, and everything

Re: [tor-relays] OnionTip.com distributes Bitcoin donations to all BTC addresses set in ContactInfo

On 10 Aug 2014, at 19:00, Tim Semeijn n...@bbln.org wrote: I really like this and I've added an address to my exits (4.2% of total exit consensus). However, for this to really kick off I'd recommend adding visibility on how many donations were received and how it was distributed across

Re: [tor-relays] Tor Relay Performance

On 24 Mar 2014, at 20:21, tor-admin tor-ad...@torland.me wrote: There a couple of sysctrl parameters that Moritz described here: https://www.torservers.net/wiki/setup/server#sysctlconf That website has at least one glaringly dangerous suggestion, namely apt-key adv --recv-keys --keyserver

Re: [tor-relays] I need to shut down my relay for a month possibly, what should I do

On Apr 15, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Moritz Bartl mor...@torservers.net wrote: On 15.04.2013 03:45, Nate Homier wrote: If I shut down for a month what will happen to my relay. What if someone chooses the same nick for their relay and so on. Nicknames are not unique. Someone can pick the same

Re: [tor-relays] big spike in cpu usage

On Apr 8, 2013, at 7:52 AM, Moritz Bartl mor...@torservers.net wrote: On 07.04.2013 20:25, Andreas Krey wrote: No, its not 'per second'. It is the amount of allowed traffic that can be saved up while not hitting the BandwidthRate to be used up when the BandwidthRate is exceeded. Wow.

Re: [tor-relays] hardware accel option in tor alpha

On Apr 1, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Sebastian Urbach wrote: Hi Sebastian, oh hai. Do you know if this applies to the released 0.3.13-alpha version from the 26th of March ? It does not, that's why I said it isn't in any released version of tor. The next one should contain it, until then you're

Re: [tor-relays] Tor Deprecation Notice

On Jan 20, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Sebastian Urbach wrote: Am Wed, 28 Dec 2011 08:07:39 -0800 schrieb Damian Johnson atag...@gmail.com: Hi Damian, Hi all. As per ticket 4788 [1] we'll soon be removing relays that are out of date and no longer safe to run, which includes anything older than

Re: [tor-relays] Authorities: what is up?

On Jan 13, 2012, at 1:40 PM, Andrew Lewis wrote: Because alpha tends to be pretty stable with tor, and the latest security fixes are in alpha a lot sooner. On Jan 13, 2012, at 12:21 PM, Steve Snyder swsny...@snydernet.net wrote: On 01/13/2012 05:27 AM, Sebastian Hahn wrote: Ah, I see

Re: [tor-relays] Authorities: what is up?

On Jan 13, 2012, at 1:27 PM, Nils Vogels wrote: Hey Sebastian, Roger, On 13/01/2012, Sebastian Hahn m...@sebastianhahn.net wrote: Ah, I see. ides not having a current consensus is different from ides being down. Ides still is running the stable Tor version and needs to be upgraded to 0.2.3

Re: [tor-relays] Authorities: what is up?

On Jan 13, 2012, at 2:57 PM, Klaus Layer wrote: Sebastian Hahn m...@sebastianhahn.net wrote on 13.01.2012: Ah, I see. ides not having a current consensus is different from ides being down. Ides still is running the stable Tor version and needs to be upgraded to 0.2.3.x to be allowed

Re: [tor-relays] consensus update request

On Jan 8, 2012, at 3:09 PM, Scott Bennett wrote: The last consensus document expired about 15 hours ago. I understand that the authority operators and tor developers are probably occupied with fixing whatever is the trouble, but if someone in that group of individuals can spare a moment