<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Excuse me, as I'm rather new to mailing
lists an the sort, but I've been tailing the conversation on and
off the last few days.<br>
<br>
I'm currently using Secured Servers through PheonixNAP as my
dedicated provider. I've used them for roughly a year now and have
had no real problems. They are located in Pheonix, Arizona.<br>
<br>
Bandwidth through them is relatively cheap. I'm paying $25/month
for a 1Gbps line with 15TB of bandwidth. $10 for the 1Gbps line
itself, then $1/TB of bandwidth I need per month. The overall cost
of my server is around $170/month. It is a quad core Xeon E3-1270
with 16GB of RAM and a 2TB hard disk. It's obviously not just for
a Tor relay, but it is more than powerful enough to run one.<br>
<br>
I had contacted one of my techs twice in the past and asked for
confirmation that they would not have any problems with me running
a Tor exit node on my server. I explained what Tor was, and
explained what running an exit node would likely entail. They
stated that they would not have a problem with it unless it caused
a large amount of abuse reports in a short time span, and if it
did, they would simply ask me to take it offline or take steps to
reduce the rate of abuse reports, but he said it would likely not
be a problem as long as I was not hosting anything illegal myself.<br>
<br>
I have not talked to them regarding a SWIP on my IP range, but
they seem like they might be willing to at least negotiate. They
had no problems setting me up with Microsoft's JMRP (Junk Mail
Reporting Program), which forwards all Hotmail/MSN abuse
complaints to me personally.<br>
<br>
Regardless, they're one of the most affordable dedicated hosting
providers I've used, and I'm quite happy with their service. They
may be a viable option for running TOR Relays, but I cannot 100%
guarantee they will have no problems with it. It may be worth
calling or e-mailing them yourselves to inquire further.<br>
<br>
(If you don't mind me sending my affiliate link and using it if
you decide to purchase from them, it would be greatly
appreciated,)<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.securedservers.com/396.html">http://www.securedservers.com/396.html</a><br>
<br>
Regular links to SecuredServers/PheonixNAP,<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<a href="http://www.securedservers.com/index.php">http://www.securedservers.com/</a><br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<a href="http://www.phoenixnap.com/">http://www.phoenixnap.com/</a><br>
<br>
On 07/26/2012 08:23 PM, Name Withheld wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAPNSmRq+jjQSrGPusBYGUqMg4DW6F-3g-wcRYGRYwqpt-5umxQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
1) What exactly would we pay for?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
Agree on 100+ mbps exit node funding. Also agree with
Moritz's suggestion that there be a form that limits fund
disbursement on a per-ISP level, to encourage ISP diversity
(and contribute to the discovery of new "known good" ISPs for
tor). <br>
<br>
*Continued* funding should be contingent on *simple* review
requirements (e.g. node must be up and passing decent traffic
during period, fund recipient must document experience with
ISP on GoodBadISP wiki page, etc) without making it a
paperwork nightmare.<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">2)
Should we fund existing relays or new ones?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
Difficult question. Would say allow both, with the agreement
that anyone those running existing relays agree to improve
service in some way (increase monthly b/w cap, set up an
additional node [even if it's a small vps that doesn't require
the amount of money funded], etc). This would allow our big
important providers to offset some of their existing costs
while still expanding the network (even if it's in nominal
terms in limited circumstances). <br>
<br>
If there's suspected abuse, run a annual/semiannual funding
review, but I imagine those gaming the system are more likely
to be small players than the larger, established providers who
were running nodes without any help. <br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
4) What exactly do we mean by diversity?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
I would look at this almost entirely from a jurisdictional and
ISP level. I believe the biggest "sudden impact" threats to
the tor network are going to be from legal changes
(jurisdictional, i.e. "save the children, nullroute the
nodes") and local business policy changes ("sorry tor
customers, no more tor egress from our DC due to
complaints"). <br>
<br>
Other threats are more likely to occur slowly, requiring less
focus on pre-planning. <br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
5) How much "should" an exit relay cost?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
$150/mo minimum. I pay roughly $130/mo with
limehost/voxility, and they're almost the cheapest physical
servers & bandwidth to be had on the internet. Western
Europe, US, & Asian locations are going to be more
expensive for a quality provider. Perhaps offer different
funding amounts based on the ISP's region?<br>
<br>
Also, review funding minimums and maximums every 3-6 months --
I think that as VPS providers become more competitive and
reliable for tor purposes (i.e. losing the metering), this is
going to could change very favorably.<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">6)
How exactly should we choose which exit relay operators to
reimburse?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
I think history is a good metric for determining how
successfully an operator will be in setting up a new node. If
you get money to one of a the major operators on the condition
of setting up a new node, I don't think they will have trouble
setting up a new node. If you give it to new guy, you had
better have strong a strong indication that they have the
skills necessary to handle becoming an overnight systems
administrator.<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
7) How do we audit / track the sponsored relays?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
Are there any known weaknesses with just checking the stats
pages? Require those selected for funds to register their
node nicknames, then check to see if they're online (and
passing a reasonable amount of traffic) couple time a month
(or week, or day... whatever).<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
8) Legal questions?<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
Really should ask friendly lawyer blogs about this one. Given
the million different jurisdictions involved with tor, there's
probably no safe answer, but I would suggest phrasing
everything as a "reimbursement" or "award" rather than a
payment to try and limit any perception that this is a
commercial activity. State in the agreement that the funds
are not to be used for commercial purposes, or something
similar, and that they do not constitute a commercial
relationship between funder and fundee.<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org">tor-relays@lists.torproject.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>