<div dir="auto"><div>Thanks, I've seen this come up before but couldn't find a good recent answer. That one helps. <div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The longstanding advice has been to run a relay if you have enough bandwidth, and a bridge if you only have a tiny bit. It seemed to me that larger bridges could help people who need them, but maybe this wouldn't help many people if the bandwidth isn't taken into account when handing them out. Is there an anonymity benefit to doing this randomly, rather than weighting the probability by bandwidth?</div><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On May 19, 2017 00:01, "tor" <<a href="mailto:tor@anondroid.com" target="_blank">tor@anondroid.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>Here's a recent thread with a good answer: <a href="https://www.mail-archive.com/tor-relays@lists.torproject.org/msg10829.html" target="_blank">https://www.mail-archi<wbr>ve.com/tor-relays@lists.torpro<wbr>ject.org/msg10829.html</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>The consensus seems to be, since bridges are allocated to users randomly, they may not see much traffic in some cases.<br></div><div><br></div><div>There's some guidance here: <a href="https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq.html.en#RelayOrBridge" target="_blank">https://www.torproject.o<wbr>rg/docs/faq.html.en#RelayOrBri<wbr>dge</a>. I think this question is raised fairly often, and it might be good to add some additional info to the FAQ.<br></div><div><br></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
tor-relays mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org" target="_blank">tor-relays@lists.torproject.or<wbr>g</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.torproject.org/c<wbr>gi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-re<wbr>lays</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div></div>
</div></div>