August 2022 - tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

recommended way to run 0.4.7 on armhf?
by ilf 25 Nov '23

25 Nov '23

What's the recommended way to run 0.4.7 on armhf? > The package repository [deb.torproject.org] does not offer 32-bit ARM > architecture (armhf) images (yet). https://support.torproject.org/apt/tor-deb-repo/ Debian has 0.4.7 in bullseye-backports. But Raspbian doesn't have bullseye-backports: http://raspbian.raspberrypi.org/raspbian/dists/ -- ilf If you upload your address book to "the cloud", I don't want to be in it.

3 6

How to reduce tor CPU load on a single bridge?
by David Fifield 19 Dec '22

19 Dec '22

The main Snowflake bridge (https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/5481936581E23D2D178105D44DB6…) is starting to become overloaded, because of a recent substantial increase in users. I think the host has sufficient CPU and memory headroom, and pluggable transport process (that receies WebSocket connections and forwards them to tor) is scaling across multiple cores. But the tor process is constantly using 100% of one CPU core, and I suspect that the tor process has become a bottleneck. Here are issues about a recent CPU upgrade on the bridge, and observations about the proportion of CPU used by different processes: https://bugs.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/pluggable-transports/snowfl… https://bugs.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/pluggable-transports/snowfl… I have the impression that tor cannot use more than one CPU core—is that correct? If so, what can be done to permit a bridge to scale beyond 1×100% CPU? We can fairly easily scale the Snowflake-specific components around the tor process, but ultimately, a tor client process expects to connect to a bridge having a certain fingerprint, and that is the part I don't know how to easily scale. * Surely it's not possible to run multiple instances of tor with the same fingerprint? Or is it? Does the answer change if all instances are on the same IP address? If the OR ports are never used? * OnionBalance does not help with this, correct? * Are there configuration options we could set to increase parallelism? * Is migrating to a host with better single-core performance the only immediate option for scaling the tor process? Separate from the topic of scaling a single bridge, here is a past issue with thoughts on scaling beyond one bridge. it looks as though there are not ways to do it that do not require changes to the way tor handles its Bridge lines. https://bugs.torproject.org/tpo/anti-censorship/pluggable-transports/snowfl… * Using multiple snowflake Bridge lines does not work well, despite that we could arrange to have the Snowflake proxy connect the user to the expected bridge, because tor will try to connect to all of them, not choose one at random. * Removing the fingerprint from the snowflake Bridge line in Tor Browser would permit the Snowflake proxies to round-robin clients over several bridges, but then the first hop would be unauthenticated (at the Tor layer). It would be nice if it were possible to specify a small set of permitted bridge fingerprints.

7 57

relayor v22.0.0-rc is released
by nusenu 03 Dec '22

03 Dec '22

Hi, relayor v22.0.0-rc is released. relayor is an ansible role that helps you with running tor relays with minimal effort (automate everything). https://github.com/nusenu/ansible-relayor#main-benefits-for-a-tor-relay-ope… Changes since relayor v21.2.0-rc: * MetricsPort support improvements: * generate nginx reverse server config for remote prometheus scraping on the relay (we do not install nginx) * generate htpasswd file for HTTP basic auth of MetricsPort on the relay * debian/ubuntu: support new alpha repos (branch name is no longer included in the repo name). * FreeBSD 12.3 is supported kind regards, nusenu -- https://nusenu.github.io

2 4

Tor 0.4.6.x is unsupported, please upgrade
by Georg Koppen 09 Oct '22

09 Oct '22

Hello! To repeat what recently[1] got brought up: it's time to get relays upgraded in case they are running the EOL 0.4.6.x Tor series. We'll start reaching out to operators with valid contact information this week and plan to reject relays which are still on 0.4.6.x in about 5 weeks from now on at the end of September. You can follow along that process in our bug tracker[2] if you want. For the general processes around dealing with EOL relays in the Tor network see my mail from last October[3]. Feedback and improvements are welcome, as always. Georg [1] https://twitter.com/torproject/status/1557392816250441728 [2] https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/network-health/team/-/issues/252 [3] https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2021-October/019862.html

4 4

One of my relays does not get a "consensus weight" value and is not in the list.
by failing.flyaway443＠mailer.me 30 Aug '22

30 Aug '22

Hello everyone, I have a question about another relay I deployed a few days ago. This time I set up two relays on a server with only one IP address, almost simultaneously. They are "Infinity1" and "Infinity2". I kept looking at the Relay Search to see how everything was going, and Infinity1 already has a consensus weight of 36000, but Infinity2's value is still at 1. So I looked at the big consensus list, and sure enough, it only has Infinity1 in it. Could it be that the Directory Authorities do not accept Infinity2 for some reason, or should I just be patient a bit longer? I also noticed that Infinity1 is already moving an average of 15Mb/s of traffic, while Infinity2 is still hanging around in the Kb range. Of course I did everything correctly, MyFamily and ContactInfo are set. Does anyone here know what this could be? The fingerprint of Infinity2 is 9F459D4756AA61D7ED05D000EA4C757FA19AC401. Thank you everyone for taking the time to think about this for a moment and have a great day to you all! Best

1 1

OOM Bytes Cell
by Nyasaki Server 29 Aug '22

29 Aug '22

Hi, my node is running for a while now, today I noticed that the cell oom bytes has risen, which never happened before. Is this concerning? What does the cell value mean? Im thankful for every input! BR Nyasaki

1 0

Closing relay
by Ole Rydahl 29 Aug '22

29 Aug '22

Since 2014 I have run a non-exit relay at my premises. However ultimo July the system load increased abruptly. Idle-cpu -typically 60-70% - dropped to 30%, _and_ with frequent drops to 0! I reduced the max bandwidth to 1.2 Mbytes. That reduces the load somewhat but still with frequent spikes where the idle-cpu hits 0 and I get the "relay too slow" indication. Any suggestions? /Ole Rydahl https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/CE1FD7659F2DFE92B883083C0C6C9 74616D17F3D

2 1

Overload
by sysmanager7 27 Aug '22

27 Aug '22

Another New one: 19:01:09 [NOTICE] General overload -> Ntor dropped (176948) fraction 25.2668% is above threshold of 0.5000% â 17:19:32 [WARN] Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation requests! Please consider using the MaxAdvertisedBandwidth â config option or choosing a more restricted exit policy. Any Ideas?? What is the syntax for MaxAdvertisedBandwidth? Currently is: MaxAdvertisedBandwidth 3Mb Sysmanager Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

1 0

missing IPv6 close events
by Toralf Förster 27 Aug '22

27 Aug '22

Playing with Python and Stem I wrote a script to monitor the ORStatus.CLOSED event reasons [1]. A helper script [2] gives statistics from those data. From the last 2 days I got: $> orstatus-stats.sh /tmp/orstatus.29051 CONNECTRESET 6197 CONNECTRESET 13214 DONE 18769 IOERROR 58 NOROUTE 1661 TIMEOUT 2562 TLS_ERROR 42461 I was wondering if it is expected that DONE is just a 1/4 of all reasons. And I do wonder why all events are IPv4 only. [1] https://github.com/toralf/torutils/blob/main/orstatus.py [2] https://github.com/toralf/torutils/blob/main/orstatus-stats.sh -- Toralf

1 0

Warn:
by sysmanager7 24 Aug '22

24 Aug '22

I got the below message on my relay #2. It's been in operation for a year and a half. First time I've ever got one of these. 0re7:26:40 [WARN] Your computer is too slow to handle this many circuit creation requests! Please consider using the MaxAdvertisedBandwidth config option or choosing a more restricted exit policy. [505 similar message(s) suppssed in last 57840 seconds] OK > Both relays operate on Digital Ocean Droplets Bandwidth on both 2 MBs Burst 3MBs both relays have the same settings NEITHER is an exit: ExitPolicy reject I see relay #2 has been restarted. Last eve it had been up four days. As of this writing just over 2 hours. Or is this another way to muck up a relay? Sysmanager Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

1 0