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 say another instance, it’s on the same hardware. > Because Tor is not fully multi-thread/multi-core, you have to run > another Tor > daemon on the same host to use 1 more CPU core and so drain another > 150-300Mbps. > Currenly, you can start up to 2 Tor daemons per IP, there is a > limitation to > avoid Sybil attack. > > Regards,
Yes, I'm aware of this, but if I can't get Tor to scale up to even 300Mbps on a single instance, adding another instance on the same hardware isn't going to magically make it reach saturation. It might improve things, seen from the network scaling it from 120Mbps to 250Mbps, but it's certainly not going to push it to 700Mbps. First, I want to find _why_ I'm not peaking either CPU usage, or bandwidth usage. That the network is a stochastic and semi-random limiter, I'm quite aware of, and adding more resources to pool that up is doable. ( Though I can't add more ipv4 addresses right now, ipv6 is plentiful, sadly, tor doesn't do very well on ipv6. ) //D.S.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays