> On 3 Mar 2018, at 02:15, Stijn Jonker <sjcjon...@sjc.nl> wrote:
> On 2 Mar 2018, at 12:08, Vasilis wrote:
> Roger Dingledine:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 06:47:00PM +0000, 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 you run a fast relay it is capped to 10k cw.
> This affects currently the 857 fastest relays.
> Yep! We had 4 running, but 2 of them had problems, and we need 3
> for the authorities to want to use the values from them.
> Perhaps it makes sense to do a call and add some more bandwidth authority
> during the upcoming meeting in Rome similar to the Montreal meeting.
> Would the following documents still be valid (They themselves state they
> might be outdated)?
> Also what bandwidth should an bwauth have available itself?
> I can see if I can support by running one, although it will be EU based.
You need a directory authority to vote on your bandwidth authority's output.
Bandwidth authorities measure relay capacity. Then they send their results to a
directory authority, and the directory authority puts the results in its vote.
directory authority votes change the consensus weights of relays.
If your bandwidth authority isn't used for voting or testing, it's just wasting
If you want to test and contribute code to a new bandwidth authority
implementation, I'd recommend:
But you'll need to change the default bandwidth server config, due to the
tor project DDoS.
tor-relays mailing list