- network-health - lists.torproject.org

Next weekly meeting 20 April 2020
by Georg Koppen 08 Apr '20

08 Apr '20

Hello! I forgot to talk about it in our weekly sync earlier this week but as next Monday is a public holiday in a bunch of jurisdictions (Easter Monday) we'll skip that meeting. The next one will be held on 20 April same time, same place. See you there, Georg

1 0

Upgrade your 'tarragon' Tor relay?
by Roger Dingledine 06 Apr '20

06 Apr '20

Hi William, You are running a Tor relay, which is great: http://rougmnvswfsmd4dq.onion/rs.html#details/1D4AB6248E3D7DF9C4FBE40DCFAA3… First: that Tor version is obsolete, and because of old bugs, we will soon cut relays running those versions out of the network. Please consider upgrading! Second: let us know if there is any way to help you bump up the bandwidth that you are allocating to the Tor relay. :) You can find Tor packages for your distro / OS here: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/TorRelayGuide#Platformspecifi… Ideally you will switch to keeping up with our stable releases, but if you need a stable that is especially stable, the Tor 0.3.5 branch will be maintained until Feb 2022: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTor… and you can see the lifetimes of other Tor versions on that table too. Let us know if we can do anything to make the process easier. And lastly, I am cc'ing the new network health mailing list (which has public archives), to help us stay synced: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkHealthTeam Thanks! --Roger

3 2

Re: [network-health] [tor-relays] Low bandwidth
by teor 01 Apr '20

01 Apr '20

Hi, I'm cc'ing the network health team, so they are aware of this issue. >>> On 30 Mar 2020, at 23:00, ha3ks ha3ks(a)protonmail.com wrote: >>> my relay dropped nearly all it’s bandwidth about a month ago, checking over it I can see 3 of the dir auths have given it a low consensus weighting, would that cause low bandwidth numbers? >>> I checked my ufw in Ubuntu and it’s allowing 443 and 80. >> >> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:44:41 +1000 >> From: teor teor(a)riseup.net >> >> I have seen similar reports from a few other relay operators. >> >> What is your relay fingerprint? >> >> Have you followed the troubleshooting instructions here: >> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/MyRelayIsSlow > > On 31 Mar 2020, at 20:46, ha3ks <ha3ks(a)protonmail.com> wrote: > > The fingerprint is - 6E1DA4C0B0C05FB721B42329C47A20DA22908AEB > > I have followed some of this yes, though its a little over my head I have opened a ticket in sbws to follow up this issue: sbws measures some relays 100x lower than Torflow https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/33775 It could be related to these other issues: sbws does not detect changes in descriptor bandwidth values https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/30733 sbws bandwidth scans should require a minimum exit bandwidth https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/33009 T

2 2

Your Tor bridge is running an obsolete version
by Philipp Winter 24 Mar '20

24 Mar '20

Hi there, You seem to be running the following Tor bridge, which is great: 2B280B23E1107BB62ABFC40DDCC8824814F80A72 But that Tor version (0.2.9.16) is obsolete, and because of old bugs, we will soon cut bridges running those versions out of the network. Please consider upgrading! You can find Tor packages and instructions for your distro / OS here: <https://community.torproject.org/relay/setup/bridge/> Ideally you will switch to keeping up with our stable releases, but if you need a stable that is especially stable, the Tor 0.3.5 branch will be maintained until Feb 2022: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTor…> and you can see the lifetimes of other Tor versions on that table too. Let us know if we can do anything to make the process easier. And lastly, I am copying the new network health mailing list (which has public archives), to help us stay synced: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkHealthTeam> Thanks, Philipp

2 2

Reminder: next weekly meetings will be on Mondays 1800 UTC
by Georg Koppen 24 Mar '20

24 Mar '20

Hello! As announced earlier[1] we'll switch to 1800 UTC as our weekly meeting time starting next Monday (3/30) after the Europeans switched to summer time. The location (#tor-meeting on the OFTC IRC network) stays the same. See you there, Georg [1] https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/network-health/2020-March/000587.html

1 0

Tor Exit Failures
by [REDACTED] 19 Mar '20

19 Mar '20

hello >From time to time (about once a week for one day) the exit scanner of arthur edelstein[1] shows my windows exit[2] with a failure rate. I usually only see this happening when the "Average probability weighted failure rate" is high too so i wonder if his measuring is reliable or if it is not a problem on my side. If the failure rate is correct is there a way for me to find out why or when the failures are happening? Georg, you wrote that you are currently doing these tests too. Could you tell me the results of my relay? Thanks [1] https://arthuredelstein.net/exits/ [2] DC81AA3B1D51566DBF27BFA562E4047AEB1C52DA

2 2

anonduke is failing to relay exit traffic
by Georg Koppen 16 Mar '20

16 Mar '20

Hello! Your relay anonduke[1] seems to fail relaying exit traffic according to our measurements. We ran tests from different vantage points and it was not possible in 10/10 cases to reach https://example.com or https://eff.org. Could you please look into that and resolve the issue on your end? Some of our runs and results are available on Github.[2] Please let us know if you have further questions and when the problem is resolved on your side. Thanks for running a relay! Georg [1] https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/FAD823A2AA7400D4A8107D7CD830… [2] https://arthuredelstein.net/exits/

1 0

dexter is failing to relay exit traffic
by Georg Koppen 16 Mar '20

16 Mar '20

Hello! Your relay dexter[1] seems to fail relaying exit traffic according to our measurements. We ran tests from different vantage points and it was not possible in 10/10 cases to reach https://example.com or https://eff.org. Could you please look into that and resolve the issue on your end? Some of our runs and results are available on Github.[2] Please let us know if you have further questions and when the problem is resolved on your side. Thanks for running a relay! Georg [1] https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/3BADB3EFFB87534736BFAC9A2024… [2] https://arthuredelstein.net/exits/

1 0

Tor1AS20435 is failing to relay exit traffic
by Georg Koppen 16 Mar '20

16 Mar '20

Hello! Your relay Tor1AS20435[1] seems to fail relaying exit traffic according to our measurements. We ran tests from differnent vantage points and it was not possible in 10/10 cases to reach https://example.com. Could you please look into that and resolve the issue on your end? Our overall runs and results are available on Github.[2] Please let us know if you have further questions and when the problem is resolved on your side. Thanks for running a relay! Georg [1] https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/AD1639F47D6233E812A67F98F9D7… [2] https://arthuredelstein.net/exits/

1 1

Exits and Tor's IPv4 /16 Path Restriction
by teor 16 Mar '20

16 Mar '20

Hi, I'm in contact with one of the exit operators in 185.220/16, which currently contains about 28% of the Tor networks exit capacity: https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#aggregate/as/185.220. They have asked me when that /16 will start causing path selection issues for tor clients. The guard and middle probabilities in that /16 are almost 0%, so I think the answer is: "Try not to put guards or middles in that /16." But I thought I'd also mention it here, because there might be wider network health issues I'm not aware of. (Since 0.3.5.1-alpha, Tor also checks the IPv6 /32 during path selection. 2 operators in that IPv4 /16 have separate IPv6 /32s, and the others don't have IPv6. So IPv4 is the stricter condition here.) T -- teor ----------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0