- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

Failing because we have 1354 connections already.Please read doc/TUNING for guidance.
by rush23＠gmx.net 11 Jan '18

11 Jan '18

2 1

Nyx reported speed
by John D. McDonnell 10 Jan '18

10 Jan '18

I'm not sure if reporting is off or something isn't configured right or whatever it could be, but when running nyx, it is telling me that the measured rate is 229.0 B/s which to me, sounds ridiculously slow. Where is it getting the measured rate from? Is it a calculation on how much data is passing in a given time or some sort of speed test from another relay or where? While I've used Tor off and on for several years, I never ran a relay until now and I'm still not certain on several aspects, though I keep digging to make sure I can supply the best exit relays I can. (I currently host 2 exit relays and hope to bring up 3 more in the near future if I can find hardware to run them on. Though I may make one a bridge.) I have some spare internet connections that are provided to us that are 25/5 connections. I configured torrc with a 500KB/s limit with 600KB/s bursting as this should work nicely to use ~4Mbps of the 5Mbps that the connection supports and allows me some bandwidth to be able to connect to the machines for monitoring and troubleshooting as well as more than enough bandwidth for downloading updates and such. The line in nyx that I'm referring to is: Bandwidth (limit: 500 KB/s, burst: 600 KB/s, measured: 229.0 B/s): Where is it getting that 229.0 B/s rate and is there anything I can do to get it closer to the 500KB/s I am trying to share. Granted, I am using a Linksys e1200 and Belkin something-or-other that I can't remember off the top of my head running DD-WRT as routers in front of the servers. (I've pondered removing the router and just connecting the server directly to the internet and relying on pf for my firewalling, but I can't do that at the one location as I also have a couple other things connected to it. Both routers are higher end consumer routers with 32MB of RAM and has 32768 for maximum ports. (Currently just under 3000 active IP connections as I'm typing this e-mail.) I might just try this on my one exit to see if this is the bottleneck I'm hitting or if there's something else affecting it. When I had first put this in place, I was using an older Netgear ProVPN router of some sort, but I swapped it out due to it flagging NTP traffic as unknown even though my server was initiating the NTP requests. But I was maintaining 200KB/s+ connections fairly consistently. It now ranges all over the place and I'm not sure if that's an issue on my end or just part of the lifecycle of a relay. I just recently rebooted the machine this happened to pop up in the nyx log window as I was looking at this: 12:33:09 [NOTICE] Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 4 days 23:59 hours, with 1928 circuits open. I've sent 37.89 GB and received 37.00 GB. To me, that seems a too low, but I've not sat down to do the math and maybe that's a good statistic for 5 days at 4Mbps. I'd appreciate any tips and pointers you can send my way. And if the consumer routers are the issue, I can move my one exit relay to one of the other connections I have and not use it at the location (or just run one that's slower) where I do use this backup internet connection. (It's handy to have a network that's not part of our internal network for testing.) Thanks for sticking with me through this whole e-mail and I apologize for rambling and jumping around a bit. I'm sure I left out some stuff and didn't clarify something else or something wasn't clear, so if you need more information, just ask. Thank you, John Penn Cambria School District This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately via email and delete this email along with any attachments from your system. Any unauthorized or improper disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this e-mail and attached documents is strictly prohibited. The views and opinions of this email or attachments are reflections of the author and are not necessarily the views and opinions of Penn Cambria School District. We do not accept responsibility or liability for any loss or damage from the receipt of this email, its use, or for any errors or omissions. www.pcam.org<http://www.pcam.org>

3 8

Configuring your relay
by Tommy Collison 09 Jan '18

09 Jan '18

Hi there, I'm Tor's writer/editor. We just got a question on Twitter that I'm stumped on, and I had a quick look through the documentation and didn't find anything. Can anyone shed some light? - Can you set up a relay to provide more bandwidth during specified hours? (e.g. more at night, less during the day.) - Is there a way of configuring the relay to work only on certain days? I assume not, and that this would have to be done manually, maybe with cron? Cheers, TC

3 2

Relay not listed in atlas
by Fabian A. Santiago 09 Jan '18

09 Jan '18

One of my relays is no longer listed in atlas. I'm curious why and how can I go about examining the issue? It had been running for several weeks at this point seemingly fine. My other relay lists it as an alleged family member but it's id is listed in a different color (yellow). Is this part of the ddos issue I've seen spoken of here? The server is accessible and Tor is running. System stats look fine. Any ideas? Thanks. -- Thanks, Fabian S. OpenPGP: 3C3FA072ACCB7AC5DB0F723455502B0EEB9070FC

3 5

Updated Fallback Directory Mirrors
by teor 09 Jan '18

09 Jan '18

Dear Relay Operators, Thanks to everyone who opted-in their relays as fallback directory mirrors. We rebuilt the list of fallbacks on the weekend. [0] The new list will come out in Tor 0.3.2.9. It will be backported to all supported Tor releases. [1] The FallbackDir flags on Consensus Health [2] have been updated. The flags on Relay Search (Atlas) [3] might take a few days to update. Don't worry if your relay missed out this time. It's still helping Tor users. And we will rebuild the fallback list again in 6-12 months time. You can keep replying to this thread to opt-in your relays. If you have multiple relays, you can opt-in as many as you like. (We picked up to 7 per operator this time, and we may pick more next time.) We are tracking fallback changes in this ticket [4]. T [0]: https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/tree/src/or/fallback_dirs.inc https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/24801 [1]: 0.2.9, 0.3.0, and 0.3.1. (0.2.5 doesn't have the fallback feature). See https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/NetworkTeam/CoreTor… [2]: https://consensus-health.torproject.org/graphs.html [3]: For example, this relay is a new fallback: https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/001524DD403D729F08F7E5D77813EF12756CF… [4]: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/24805 -- Tim / teor PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n ------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

what are these spikes
by Paul Templeton 09 Jan '18

09 Jan '18

Hi all, just a query - I get these unusual spikes on https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/867B95CACD64653FEEC4D2CEFC5C49B462030… (have a look at the three month chart) and I notice some of the other AU relays do the same. can anyone tell me what they are???? Paul

2 2

*BSD bridge operators
by George 08 Jan '18

08 Jan '18

For anyone running *BSD bridges that wasn't aware, there are obfs4proxy packages/ports available for each of the BSDs: FreeBSD as security/obfs4proxy-tor NetBSD as net/obfs4proxy OpenBSD as net/obfs4proxy DragonFlyBSD as security/obfs4proxy-tor For assisting aggressively censored users, bridges really should consider configuring obf4sproxy. g -- 34A6 0A1F F8EF B465 866F F0C5 5D92 1FD1 ECF6 1682

2 1

Really strange
by r1610091651 07 Jan '18

07 Jan '18

Outcome of a script to count # connections /24 range 11 188.214.30.* 20 37.48.104.* 22 37.48.86.* 33 5.79.72.* 48 212.32.226.* 97 212.32.239.* 197 149.202.66.* 294 5.79.103.* 303 198.7.59.* 358 207.244.110.* 380 162.210.192.* 394 207.244.70.* 395 199.115.112.* 499 54.36.51.* And that on my lowly relay (consesus of 1k) Other relays seeing this too?

3 10

Re: [tor-relays] [tor-dev] Relay diversity master thesis
by grarpamp 07 Jan '18

07 Jan '18

On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 8:29 AM, teor <teor2345(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 22 Dec 2017, at 11:23, Robin Descamps <robin.descamps(a)outlook.com> wrote: >> May I ask you advices/feedback about this master thesis plan? >> The master thesis plan: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1XEOSS29owavKJ_cJJAVaPiJe34Ez6XXx >> The poster: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1BlF2U-Kexyz6ihVSqvsVHv4PUsvXATc4 > In particular, operators that could perform end-to-end correlation? > Have you considered the relay's Operating System? If considering as yet non tor daemon, non measured, non consensus voted things like operators and OS, then you should extend research into similar meta parameters about the relays themselves such as datacenter hosted vs cable/dsl/fiber "home" relays, country locations, opposing legal jurisdictions, operation by "known" or "trusted" operators / entities or not, by working / fake / no contact info, by any PKI Web Of Trust asserted among operators, funding sources, employer / corporate / political / other affiliations, statistical analysis of historical relay "presence" on the network (add/drop/uptime, nicknames, movement, versions, bulk turnups, correlation groups, etc), and many more possible metas that people should think up and add to this list. That research then followed by development of third party subscription lists of categorized / ranked relays the user or tor daemon may further pluggably select from when choosing nodes to path through. There have been posts on tor-relays@ and tor-talk@ that mention more about these sorts of meta parameters. AFAIK, no one has done any research into them or their potential impact / benefits, whether to particularly affected, or for plain preferential choice users, or to the network as a whole. So the chance of a first good paper in the area awaits whoever does that meta analysis project. [xpost for open project oppurtunity]

1 0

Fallback Directory Mirror changed
by cxx 06 Jan '18

06 Jan '18

Hi there, took a while longer than expected, but my relay has now moved to a new IP address, it's running on 37.157.255.35 now, so it could be re-added to the list. Regards cxx > > On 16 Nov 2017, at 15:05, teor <teor2345(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 15 Nov 2017, at 21:13, cxx <tor(a)cxx.rocks> wrote: > >> I have to move my node to another server, as this one is running > >> unstable in the past weeks. Unfortunately, I can't keep the ip-address > >> 217.79.190.25, which is in the the list of fallback > >> directory mirrors, so the IP should be removed or changed. > > Thanks for letting me know. > > We are tracking changes in this ticket, when we get enough, someone > > will do them all: > > https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/22321#comment:10 > > It looks like your relay hasn't moved. > We've removed it from the list for now. > When it gets its new address, please email tor-relays, and CC me.

1 0