Hi,
On 2 Jun 2019, at 13:30, teor teor@riseup.net wrote:
On 2 Jun 2019, at 05:22, Roger Dingledine arma@torproject.org wrote:
I've been talking to a longtime exit relay operator, who is in the odd position of having a good 1gbit network connection, but only one IP address.
He used to push an average of 500mbit on his exit relay, but then the HSDir DoS flatlined his relay for a while (!), and now, perhaps due to the bwauth variability, his exit relay only recovered to maybe 200mbit. He is running a second exit relay on that IP address, but also perhaps due to the bwauth variability, it hasn't attracted much attention either.
I'd like to confirm the problem before we make major network changes. (And I'd like to know how widespread it is.)
Which bandwidth authorities are limiting the consensus weight of these relays? Where are they located?
Are the relays' observed bandwidths limiting their consensus weight?
Here's how the operator can find out: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/MyRelayIsSlow#TorNetworkLi...
If the relays are being measured by longclaw's sbws instance, we should also look at their detailed measurement diagnostics.
longclaw's bandwidth file is available at: http://199.58.81.140/tor/status-vote/next/bandwidth
For example, this relay is limited by Comcast's poor peering to MIT and Europe. We've spoken to a few Comcast relay operators with similar issues.
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2019-June/017376.html
Adding more tor instances on networks like Comcast would only slow down Tor.
The real answer is to fix the bandwidth measurement infrastructure.
Do we have funding to continue to improve the bandwidth measurement infrastructure? Or to maintain it?
If we don't have any grants in the pipeline, now would be a good time to start some.
I wrote to the grants team about bandwidth authority funding.
T