<div dir="ltr">Based on found numbers, some thoughts:<div>* shouldn't there be more authority servers? DNS system has 13 root servers spread over the globe...</div><div>* not all authority servers are equal:</div><div>** reported data varies greatly between servers</div><div><a href="https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health-2016-11-08-19-00.html#36EE8D47E570B8D5515460A9972F3CFD9EDFDFCE">https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health-2016-11-08-19-00.html#36EE8D47E570B8D5515460A9972F3CFD9EDFDFCE</a>: <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:medium">maatuska=1400 <> </span><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:medium">gabelmoo=4060</span></div><div>** some authorities vary greatly in reported data:</div><div><a href="https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health-2016-11-08-19-00.html#36EE8D47E570B8D5515460A9972F3CFD9EDFDFCE">https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health-2016-11-08-19-00.html#36EE8D47E570B8D5515460A9972F3CFD9EDFDFCE</a>: gabelmoo=4060<br></div><div><a href="https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health-2016-11-08-18-00.html#36EE8D47E570B8D5515460A9972F3CFD9EDFDFCE">https://consensus-health.torproject.org/consensus-health-2016-11-08-18-00.html#36EE8D47E570B8D5515460A9972F3CFD9EDFDFCE</a>: gabelmoo=2110<br></div><div>* authority participating in consensus change, and with only few active (4-5) at a time, impact of a single authority on network is amplified</div><div><br></div><div>By having more servers</div><div>* consensus would be more stable (low-median)</div><div>* leading to more accurate assessment of nodes</div><div>* and wider utilisation of the available nodes</div><div>* leading to higher network throughput</div><div><br></div><div>Does that sound plausible?</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div>Seb</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 at 17:37 r1610091651 <<a href="mailto:r1610091651@telenet.be">r1610091651@telenet.be</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg">Thanks for the link to consensus-health, based data available:<div class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"></div><div class="gmail_msg">05/11 17:00</div><div class="gmail_msg">longclaw=4540</div><div class="gmail_msg">gabelmoo=4170</div><div class="gmail_msg">moria1=4410</div><div class="gmail_msg">faravahar=2520</div><div class="gmail_msg">=> cons: 4170</div><div class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"></div><div class="gmail_msg">05/11 18:00</div><div class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_msg">longclaw=4550</div><div class="gmail_msg">gabelmoo=<b class="gmail_msg">2170</b></div><div class="gmail_msg">moria1=4410</div><div class="gmail_msg">faravahar=2520</div><div class="gmail_msg">=> cons:<span class="m_-8008845416134152476inbox-inbox-Apple-converted-space gmail_msg"> </span><b class="gmail_msg">2520</b></div></div><div class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"></div><div class="gmail_msg"><font size="2" class="gmail_msg">So that explains the drop.</font></div><div class="gmail_msg"><font size="2" class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"></font></div><div class="gmail_msg"><font size="2" class="gmail_msg">Seb</font></div></div><br class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_quote gmail_msg"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg">On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 at 13:40 teor <<a href="mailto:teor2345@gmail.com" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">teor2345@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class="gmail_msg"></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote gmail_msg" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br class="gmail_msg">
> On 8 Nov. 2016, at 23:32, r1610091651 <<a href="mailto:r1610091651@telenet.be" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">r1610091651@telenet.be</a>> wrote:<br class="gmail_msg">
><br class="gmail_msg">
> The previous drops, i know why they happened (related to server unavailability) so I know the cause. For 5th however I have no clue.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
As far as I can tell, the relay is accurately measured.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
Sometimes, this means that you get a lower measurement than you might have<br class="gmail_msg">
had before.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
Accurate bandwidth measurements are a good thing for tor users, even if the<br class="gmail_msg">
changes in the measurement are sometimes (temporarily) disappointing to relay<br class="gmail_msg">
operators.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
If you want to improve the measurements, try adding more bandwidth.<br class="gmail_msg">
For your relay, this means increasing BandwidthRate and BandwidthBurst.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
T<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
--<br class="gmail_msg">
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
teor2345 at gmail dot com<br class="gmail_msg">
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B<br class="gmail_msg">
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n<br class="gmail_msg">
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org<br class="gmail_msg">
------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
_______________________________________________<br class="gmail_msg">
tor-relays mailing list<br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">tor-relays@lists.torproject.org</a><br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays</a><br class="gmail_msg">
</blockquote></div></blockquote></div>