Hi John, thanks for pointing this out! Just took a quick peek at the source and the 'measured: x' comes from your relay's consensus entry. On reflection though that's stupid of me since that's the bandwidth authority weight which is a unit-less heuristic (baka!).
https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt#n2234 I should probably simply drop that from the interface. Filed a ticket to remind me to do so... https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/24832 Sorry about the confusion! Nyx should be showing an average metric as well which is based on the samplings it sees. *That* should be more helpful. Cheers! -Damian On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 10:56 AM, John D. McDonnell <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure if reporting is off or something isn't configured right or > whatever it could be, but when running nyx, it is telling me that the > measured rate is 229.0 B/s which to me, sounds ridiculously slow. Where is it > getting the measured rate from? Is it a calculation on how much data is > passing in a given time or some sort of speed test from another relay or > where? While I've used Tor off and on for several years, I never ran a relay > until now and I'm still not certain on several aspects, though I keep digging > to make sure I can supply the best exit relays I can. (I currently host 2 > exit relays and hope to bring up 3 more in the near future if I can find > hardware to run them on. Though I may make one a bridge.) > > I have some spare internet connections that are provided to us that are 25/5 > connections. I configured torrc with a 500KB/s limit with 600KB/s bursting as > this should work nicely to use ~4Mbps of the 5Mbps that the connection > supports and allows me some bandwidth to be able to connect to the machines > for monitoring and troubleshooting as well as more than enough bandwidth for > downloading updates and such. > > The line in nyx that I'm referring to is: > Bandwidth (limit: 500 KB/s, burst: 600 KB/s, measured: 229.0 B/s): > Where is it getting that 229.0 B/s rate and is there anything I can do to get > it closer to the 500KB/s I am trying to share. > > Granted, I am using a Linksys e1200 and Belkin something-or-other that I > can't remember off the top of my head running DD-WRT as routers in front of > the servers. (I've pondered removing the router and just connecting the > server directly to the internet and relying on pf for my firewalling, but I > can't do that at the one location as I also have a couple other things > connected to it. Both routers are higher end consumer routers with 32MB of > RAM and has 32768 for maximum ports. (Currently just under 3000 active IP > connections as I'm typing this e-mail.) I might just try this on my one exit > to see if this is the bottleneck I'm hitting or if there's something else > affecting it. > > When I had first put this in place, I was using an older Netgear ProVPN > router of some sort, but I swapped it out due to it flagging NTP traffic as > unknown even though my server was initiating the NTP requests. But I was > maintaining 200KB/s+ connections fairly consistently. It now ranges all over > the place and I'm not sure if that's an issue on my end or just part of the > lifecycle of a relay. > > I just recently rebooted the machine this happened to pop up in the nyx log > window as I was looking at this: > 12:33:09 [NOTICE] Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 4 days 23:59 hours, with 1928 > circuits open. I've sent 37.89 GB and received 37.00 GB. > To me, that seems a too low, but I've not sat down to do the math and maybe > that's a good statistic for 5 days at 4Mbps. > > I'd appreciate any tips and pointers you can send my way. And if the consumer > routers are the issue, I can move my one exit relay to one of the other > connections I have and not use it at the location (or just run one that's > slower) where I do use this backup internet connection. (It's handy to have a > network that's not part of our internal network for testing.) > > Thanks for sticking with me through this whole e-mail and I apologize for > rambling and jumping around a bit. I'm sure I left out some stuff and didn't > clarify something else or something wasn't clear, so if you need more > information, just ask. > > Thank you, > John > > > Penn Cambria School District > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended > only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you have received > this email in error, please notify the sender immediately via email and > delete this email along with any attachments from your system. Any > unauthorized or improper disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the > contents of this e-mail and attached documents is strictly prohibited. The > views and opinions of this email or attachments are reflections of the author > and are not necessarily the views and opinions of Penn Cambria School > District. We do not accept responsibility or liability for any loss or damage > from the receipt of this email, its use, or for any errors or omissions. > > www.pcam.org<http://www.pcam.org> > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
