<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<div>right, cause of that i thought about splitting the total mozilla- bandwidth through 10 relays insted of 12 relays
could raise bandwidth per server above the guardlimit to hold it more constantly. but i would belive if this is not
requested by consensus. longterm wight seems not to be affected cause of gaining or losing guardflag. ...but what we
want are nonmalicious guards, right? so maybe it could make sense anyway.
<br />
<br />
<div>
<div>On Tue, February 17, 2015 21:09, s7r <s7r@sky-ip.org> wrote:bandwidth</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
<br />
Hash: SHA256
<br />
<br />
The speed matters. Some time ago, Guard flag parameters were changed
<br />
little bit, so now the Guard flag is assigned to 25% of the fastest
<br />
relays in the network (of course which are also stable and have good
<br />
uptime and have been around in the network for a while). This means
<br />
that if the speed drops down, the Guard flag could go away with it. By
<br />
the reference speed I can see below of 1.51 MB/s it's quite near/under
<br />
the limit.
<br />
<br />
If you had for example 5MB/s constant, you would not lose the Guard
<br />
flag not even some of the times.
<br />
<br />
On 2/17/2015 9:22 PM, lpwzi9i84@use.startmail.com wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">probably needless concerns, right. i see, thanks for clearing this
<br />
out for me!
<br />
<br />
<br />
On Tue, February 17, 2015 20:11, Kurt Besig <kbesig@socal.rr.com>
<br />
wrote:
<br />
<br />
On 2/17/2015 10:59 AM, lpwzi9i84@use.startmail.com wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">at this very moment all of them got the flag, right. But
<br />
theyre loosing it at seemingly random order. I kept an eye on
<br />
Atlas for some time, at 18:00 (UTC+1) Mozilla13 was at 1.51
<br />
MB/s without Guardflag.
<br />
<br />
<br />
On Tue, February 17, 2015 19:50, Nusenu
<br />
<nusenu@openmailbox.org> wrote:
<br />
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">i am wondering about losing of guard state of the
<br />
Mozilla Middle Relays.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br />
what makes you think they [1] lost guard flag?
<br />
<br />
[1] https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/mozilla
<br />
https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health.html
<br />
<br />
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
My relay gains/loses guard occasionally, what's the concern
<br />
regarding?>> _______________________________________________
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
<br />
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
<br />
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
<br />
<br />
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br />
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
<br />
software. http://www.avast.com
<br />
<br />
_______________________________________________ tor-relays
<br />
mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
<br />
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</blockquote>
<br />
<br />
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing
<br />
list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
<br />
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
<br />
</blockquote>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br />
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
<br />
<br />
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJU45/zAAoJEIN/pSyBJlsRfDAH/166+H8bai2yKRe6lcDmjrxd
<br />
2Ymd1VH5GlntTywhDvYvnBK7y7iVhN7A/OxOSEjh2mzJ2lLY7FScpCuNJLAJnOxF
<br />
gDVLA7Zd26C2tnNKr8Gc0eCR+8ZcfirXYCkxvLQfzZBDB45UHmsBF5usThS10qg2
<br />
k8LkQimtxEJZ84FjfYigEpBWgG9QwsAtqTD4sSJA1T5Nfp8yahmT7S4xxfhTUxXN
<br />
Sh2dvLsQVgnFtevoNcXHPNAHb+UqdEbu/V8SEdq7hvEfs2deH46C5+l6493gFt8l
<br />
khAkF+WRjSIDTxUK5sF2FvWWwkopELMlqRfkSBm7VUeebApXzuDxkzvPoissKLM=
<br />
=QVek
<br />
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br />
_______________________________________________
<br />
tor-relays mailing list
<br />
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
<br />
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>