[tor-relays] Alleged Family Members / Stable flag "issues"

2017-12-14 Thread Stijn Jonker
ks! -- Yours Sincerely / Met Vriendelijke groet, Stijn Jonker 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] Alleged Family Members / Stable flag "issues"

2017-12-14 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi Teor, Thanks for responding: On 14 Dec 2017, at 22:56, teor wrote: > On 15 Dec 2017, at 06:38, Stijn Jonker <sjcjon...@sjc.nl> wrote: For a little short of a year I'm running Relay SJC01 (328E54981C6DDD7D89B89E418724A4A7881E3192), there was some unnoticed outage of the re

Re: [tor-relays] Alleged Family Members / Stable flag "issues"

2017-12-14 Thread Stijn Jonker
like stale data somewhere. If it's not on my side then I'm sure it will correct at some point in time. thx, Stijn -- Yours Sincerely / Met Vriendelijke groet, Stijn Jonker sjcjon...@sjc.nl ___ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https

Re: [tor-relays] botnet? abusing/attacking guard nodes

2017-12-20 Thread Stijn Jonker
, to the extend possible, with the current protocol. For instance dropping clients (source IP's) that frequently connect but are not behaving. I understand this might have it's implications when under censorship/censorship countermeasures. -- Yours Sincerely / Met Vriendelijke groet, Stijn Jonker

[tor-relays] Q about: The IPv4 ORPort address does not match the descriptor address

2017-12-27 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi All, As a follow-up to the thread, "Can it be done? - IPv6 only Relay" I linked the new OpenBSD Relay via an IPv4 over IPv6 tunnel to the other relay I operate. So there is: SJC01 / 328E54981C6DDD7D89B89E418724A4A7881E3192 and now SJC02 / 366BC592BC0154C0CD1D35C0E77D8F2C7F0B843E Both share

[tor-relays] Can it be done? - IPv6 only Relay

2017-12-25 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi tor geniuses, Having some bandwidth to spare, and "some" IPv6 addresses but no IPv4. I decided to setup an IPv6 only relay, and for diversity on OpenBSD, but I'm having trouble getting online. Is there any feasible way to do this as IPv6 only relay? [root@tornode2 tor]# grep -v -e ^$ -e ^#

Re: [tor-relays] Can it be done? - IPv6 only Relay

2017-12-25 Thread Stijn Jonker
ts/tor/ticket/5788> -- 4096R/A83CE748 > Valters Jansons > > On Mon, Dec 25, 2017, 12:52 nusenu <nusenu-li...@riseup.net> wrote: >> >> >> Stijn Jonker: >> > Hi tor geniuses, >> > >> > Having some bandwidth to spare, and "some" IP

Re: [tor-relays] Can it be done? - IPv6 only Relay

2017-12-25 Thread Stijn Jonker
still to take place.> > -- 4096R/A83CE748 Valters Jansons > > On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 2:38 PM Stijn Jonker <sjcjon...@sjc.nl> wrote:>> __ >> Hi Nusenu/Valters, >> >> Thanks for the reply and links; what isn’t entirely clear is the >> following sce

Re: [tor-relays] Can it be done? - IPv6 only Relay

2017-12-25 Thread Stijn Jonker
tarted it with cached-* files from an other tor instance, otherwise it was stuck at 0% Thx again On 25 Dec 2017, at 11:07, Stijn Jonker wrote: > Hi tor geniuses, > > Having some bandwidth to spare, and "some" IPv6 addresses but no IPv4. I > decided to setup an IPv6 only relay,

Re: [tor-relays] nyx question on info on top right side, present on CentOS, missing on Debian.

2018-02-04 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi Damian, On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Stijn Jonker <sjcjon...@sjc.nl> wrote: Hi All, So I'm running two relays, one is running on CentOS7, the other Debian Stretch. On both I have nyx (2.0.4) installed. The "Debian" one is missing the CPU, Exit policy etc info. It's

Re: [tor-relays] nyx question on info on top right side, present on CentOS, missing on Debian.

2018-02-04 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi Stain, On 4 Feb 2018, at 14:56, Stian Fauskanger wrote: Hi Stijn, So I'm running two relays, one is running on CentOS7, the other Debian Stretch. On both I have nyx (2.0.4) installed. The "Debian" one is missing the CPU, Exit policy etc info. It's not tor version specific, as I recently

[tor-relays] Attack or issue? 4 / 11 M of traffic

2018-01-30 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi All, Since around midnight CET, my relay who was happily running almost the same amount of traffic in and outbound, has dropped to 4 Meg in, 11 Meg out according to SNMP on the host. (Cap: 10M/peak 12.5M). Lots of messages like: - Channel padding timeout scheduled 304317ms in the past. -

[tor-relays] nyx question on info on top right side, present on CentOS, missing on Debian.

2018-02-03 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi All, I initially went to the nyx website to find the right forum to ask questions. I understood this is the one :-), if not apologies. So I'm running two relays, one is running on CentOS7, the other Debian Stretch. On both I have nyx (2.0.4) installed. The "Debian" one is missing the

[tor-relays] 1 circuit using 1.5Gig or ram? [0.3.3.2-alpha]

2018-02-12 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi all, So in general 0.3.3.1-alpha-dev and 0.3.3.2-alpha running on two nodes without any connection limits on the iptables firewall seems to be a lot more robust against the recent increase in clients (or possible [D]DoS). But tonight for a short period of time one of the relays was running

Re: [tor-relays] 1 circuit using 1.5Gig or ram? [0.3.3.2-alpha]

2018-02-12 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi Tor & Others, On 12 Feb 2018, at 20:29, tor wrote: I see this occasionally. It's not specific to 0.3.3.x. I reported it back in October 2017: Thx, I more or less added the version in the subject to clearly indicate it was on an alpha release

Re: [tor-relays] 1 circuit using 1.5Gig or ram? [0.3.3.2-alpha]

2018-02-12 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi David, On 12 Feb 2018, at 20:44, David Goulet wrote: > On 12 Feb (20:09:35), Stijn Jonker wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> So in general 0.3.3.1-alpha-dev and 0.3.3.2-alpha running on two nodes >> without any connection limits on the iptables firewall seems to be a

Re: [tor-relays] - Feedback expected? - Experimental DoS mitigation is in tor master

2018-02-05 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi all, Not sure where to hook into the discussion, apologies of offending anyone spanning of a new thread from this first message. On 31 Jan 2018, at 10:16, Roger Dingledine wrote: > Hi folks, > > Thanks for your patience with the relay overload issues. > > We've merged

Re: [tor-relays] Q about: The IPv4 ORPort address does not match the descriptor address

2017-12-28 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi "Tor", Ehmm.. On 27 Dec 2017, at 21:07, tor wrote: > I think you just have a typo here: > >> ORPort 80.127.177.180:993 NoListen > > 177 instead of 117 for the third octet. Duh... .. Thx! S___ tor-relays mailing list

Re: [tor-relays] Recent wave of abuse on Tor guards

2017-12-22 Thread Stijn Jonker
All, Just adding 0.02c; from the hosts going above 24 connections (my FW limit), the ASN's involved seem to focus on: 5 LEASEWEB-USA-WDC-01 - Leaseweb USA, Inc., US 18 OVH, FR 25 LEASEWEB-NL-AMS-01 Netherlands, NL That's 48 from the 72 IP's exhibiting this behaviour. Whereby the

[tor-relays] Tor 0.3.2.9 Linux - first period fine, since today lots of: Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation requests!

2018-01-18 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi All, Is this a "known" issue, my non-exit relay has been running for over a year, and although with the recent issues (attack / network issue or the likes) with some ipfilter kunfu it managed to get through the storm pretty well. Now all of a sudden since early today my logs are flooded

Re: [tor-relays] less than 3 bw auths available: self-measurement (with 10k cap in effect)

2018-03-04 Thread Stijn Jonker
Hi Teor & Others, Thanks for your response, On 2 Mar 2018, at 23:26, teor wrote: > > On 3 Mar 2018, at 02:15, Stijn Jonker <sjcjon...@sjc.nl> wrote: >> >> On 2 Mar 2018, at 12:08, Vasilis wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Roger Dingledine: >>

Re: [tor-relays] less than 3 bw auths available: self-measurement (with 10k cap in effect)

2018-03-02 Thread Stijn Jonker
On 2 Mar 2018, at 12:08, Vasilis wrote: > Hi, > > Roger Dingledine: >> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 06:47:00PM +, nusenu wrote: > >>> if your relays behave strangely in terms of bandwidth seen, than this >>> might be due to the fact that there are less than 3 bw auth votes available. >>> >>> If

[tor-relays] Shutdown relay 366BC592BC0154C0CD1D35C0E77D8F2C7F0B843E, upcoming shutdown 328E54981C6DDD7D89B89E418724A4A7881E3192

2018-03-05 Thread Stijn Jonker
Dear all, This is to announce that with immediate effect I have shutdown relay sjc02/366BC592BC0154C0CD1D35C0E77D8F2C7F0B843E and will do so in about a year and half with sjc01/328E54981C6DDD7D89B89E418724A4A7881E3192 as it's a fallback directory. Thanks for all the support on the mailing