On ons, 2016-09-21 at 17:29 +0200, Aeris wrote:
> >
> > 17 MBytes/s in each direction.
>
> From Atlas graph, your node is currently growing up, so wait few
> weeks more to
> have the real bandwidth consumption, but don’t expect huge change.
It looks as if it stabilized a while ago, and I see
On tor, 2016-09-22 at 06:29 +1000, teor wrote:
> >
> > On 22 Sep 2016, at 05:41, nusenu wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > So, how do we get tor to move past 100-200Mbit? Is it just a
> > > > > waiting game?
> >
> > I'd say just run more instances if you
On tor, 2016-09-22 at 12:08 +0200, Aeris wrote:
> >
> > Scaling up on more hardware is always an option, but I really want
> > to
> > push the limit of the exit node, as the others won't be exits
> > (Local
> > network design, really) , and exit traffic is always more
> > interesting.
>
> When I
On ons, 2016-10-26 at 15:32 +0200, D. S. Ljungmark wrote:
> On tis, 2016-10-25 at 22:52 +1100, teor wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 25 Oct. 2016, at 22:26, D.S. Ljungmark <ljungm...@modio.se>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> >
On tis, 2016-10-25 at 13:34 +0200, Volker Mink wrote:
> Apart from your topic - what kind of internet connection do you use?
> :D
Gigabit dedicated fiber.
//D.S.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
tor-relays mailing
On tis, 2016-10-25 at 22:52 +1100, teor wrote:
> >
> > On 25 Oct. 2016, at 22:26, D.S. Ljungmark
> > wrote:
> >
> > So, Now I've taken some steps to adjust the state of the relay, and
> > try to balance this.
> >
> > To reiterate a point previously, before I start adding