On 09/10/2014 09:07 PM, Toralf Förster wrote: > This is what I get few days ago from Hetzer Support: >> Guten Tag Herr Förster, >> [...] > Maybe worth to update > https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/GoodBadISPs ?
Hetzner is already listed as both good and bad. You're invited to add your statement (it's a wiki!), but it is nearly a dupe of what is already quoted there. > ========= > I'm planning to setup there a dedicated server now soon (with Gentoo Linux > if possible) within next days - or are there too much servers already > at the ISP Hetzner ? https://compass.torproject.org/ , enter AS24940, and select "group by AS": 6.5% advertised bandwidth, 8.5% Guard probability, 10.5% Middle probability, 2.0485% Exit probability. When you just group by AS, Hetzner is third in bandwidth and 13th in exit probability. Overall, I would strongly suggest a different provider, but there is no groud truth on how much bandwidth any ISP (or country) should see. > And for the following days I do want put the line > "ExitPolicy reject *:*" > before all subsequent liens like > "ExitPolicy accept *:20-23 # FTP, SSH, telnet" > > of the reduced exit policy to just look how the system behaves > as a simply relay. Worth or superflous ? It takes quite long for a relay to reach a stable state, as it will take time to be picked as Guard by enough clients. See https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay for more details. You can of course change exit policy whenever you like, but to better be able to see the effect it takes several weeks in each phase. > Am I right, that later just commenting out that reject line enhance > the Tor server from relay to "relay + exit node" ? Yes, this should work. -- Moritz Bartl https://www.torservers.net/ _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
