- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

I would like to help.
by Generalgrievous 03 Apr '16

03 Apr '16

I have a Banana Pi that I would like to use to help the TOR network. I have installed Debian-Jessie and started researching the process for setting up relay, even an exit. I am a total noob, but willing to learn. If someone is willing to help me step by step, I would be excited to help. I've tested my internet speed, Download average 60 mbps, Upload avreage 6 mbps, If I would be more of a hindrance than a benefit, please say so, no hard feelings. Located Central CA. General G. Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), encrypted email based in Switzerland.

6 6

Earned T-shirt and no email response for months
by Dimitar Milkov 02 Apr '16

02 Apr '16

Hello, My relay earned me a Tor T-shirt a couple of months ago. I emailed the team responsible for them on the email given in the T-shirt descriprion page (https://www.torproject.org/getinvolved/tshirt.html) with size, shipping address and everything, and the notification email from Tor Weather also included. However, there is still no response. I asked in IRC after the first month or so and some people said that they are overloaded with work because of some campaign/conference sort of thing. How long it usually takes for a T-shirt request to be processed? What is your experience?

4 4

Re: [tor-relays] Relays with broken DirPorts
by starlight.2016q1＠binnacle.cx 02 Apr '16

02 Apr '16

These relays all appear at least somewhat overrated by BWauths and are not rate-limiting with BandwidthRate. DirPort performance is bad due to a saturated physical link or 'tc' bandwidth limit, so TCP congestion back-off kicks in. If BandwidthRate were the limiting factor DirPort would return a 503 (busy) error. Reason for the overrating is a serious bug in Torflow resulting in relays going unmeasured for extended periods, possibly more than 30 days at which time a BWauth will cease listing an affected relay. I'm planning to work on fixing this, but have not had the time and presently don't see getting to it before early summer. >Dear Relay Operators, > >Also while working on #17158, I found some relays whose DirPort >responses made my python script hang. It wouldn't even respond >to ^C, but that might just be an OS X thing, or a stem thing. > >I'm not sure what to do about these relays. I'd like to do a >tcpdump / Wireshark check, but I don't have time at the moment. >Would anyone like to follow this up? > >This is an incomplete list of broken relay IPs and DirPorts, >starting with those with the highest consensus weight: >217.23.14.190:1194 >151.80.164.147:80 >148.251.255.92:80 >78.142.19.59:80 > >Thanks > >Tim > >Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

3 2

Relays with very slow DirPorts
by Tim Wilson-Brown - teor 31 Mar '16

31 Mar '16

Dear Relay Operators, While I was checking fallback directory mirrors for #17158, I encountered some relays that took more than a minute to serve a consensus. Most took 150 seconds, which could be caused by a RelayBandwidthRate of 10 kilobytes a second. One solution to this issue is to disable the DirPort on relays with a RelayBandwidthRate less than 50 kilobytes a second, or more than 30s to serve a consensus. https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18688 (This ticket also contains the python / stem code that I'm using to check the consensus download speed.) But I don't actually know if it's the relays' torrc configuration that's causing the issue, or if their provider is limiting their speeds, or if there's some other issue. If you're the operator of one of the relays listed below, can you let me know? And if someone wants to investigate further, or contact these operators on their ContactInfo, that would be great. (I don't have time right now, I'm trying to pull together a list of fallback directories before the 0.2.8-rc.) This is an incomplete list of slow relay IPs and DirPorts, starting with those with the highest consensus weight: 217.198.117.122:80 212.47.250.44:80 158.69.112.86:80 50.7.178.34:80 191.101.251.172:80 51.254.249.177:80 188.165.232.40:80 104.236.38.231:8080 89.163.225.184:9030 185.31.230.69:9030 81.7.14.227:9030 62.210.238.33:9030 164.132.56.137:9030 212.107.149.145:9030 94.23.165.33:9031 Thanks Tim Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B teor at blah dot im OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F

1 1

Re: [tor-relays] Relays with broken DirPorts
by Tim Wilson-Brown - teor 31 Mar '16

31 Mar '16

> On 31 Mar 2016, at 11:23, Michael McConville <mmcco(a)mykolab.com> wrote: > > You'll probably get through to more people if you include nicknames with > IP addresses, and if you send an email to the operators who listed their > address in ContactInfo. I was actually hoping that someone else would do that for me, I'm a little snowed under at the moment. Tim > > Thanks for this, > Mike > > Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote: >> Dear Relay Operators, >> >> Also while working on #17158, I found some relays whose DirPort responses made my python script hang. It wouldn't even respond to ^C, but that might just be an OS X thing, or a stem thing. >> >> I'm not sure what to do about these relays. I'd like to do a tcpdump / Wireshark check, but I don't have time at the moment. >> Would anyone like to follow this up? >> >> This is an incomplete list of broken relay IPs and DirPorts, starting with those with the highest consensus weight: >> 217.23.14.190:1194 >> 151.80.164.147:80 >> 148.251.255.92:80 >> 78.142.19.59:80 >> >> Thanks >> >> Tim >> >> Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) >> >> teor2345 at gmail dot com >> PGP 968F094B >> >> teor at blah dot im >> OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B teor at blah dot im OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F

1 1

Relays with broken DirPorts
by Tim Wilson-Brown - teor 31 Mar '16

31 Mar '16

Dear Relay Operators, Also while working on #17158, I found some relays whose DirPort responses made my python script hang. It wouldn't even respond to ^C, but that might just be an OS X thing, or a stem thing. I'm not sure what to do about these relays. I'd like to do a tcpdump / Wireshark check, but I don't have time at the moment. Would anyone like to follow this up? This is an incomplete list of broken relay IPs and DirPorts, starting with those with the highest consensus weight: 217.23.14.190:1194 151.80.164.147:80 148.251.255.92:80 78.142.19.59:80 Thanks Tim Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B teor at blah dot im OTR CAD08081 9755866D 89E2A06F E3558B7F B5A9D14F

1 0

Tor Exclude Nodes Misbehaving
by stealth＠nym.mixmin.net 30 Mar '16

30 Mar '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I have edited my torrc file on my Tor Client to exclude several countries, but I keep getting the United Kingdom in my pathway. My torrc file is below: DataDirectory C:\Users\Myname\Tor Browser\Browser\TorBrowser\Data\Tor GeoIPFile C:\Users\Myname\Tor Browser\Browser\TorBrowser\Data\Tor\geoip GeoIPv6File C:\Users\Myname\Tor Browser\Browser\TorBrowser\Data\Tor\geoip6 ExitNodes {PL}, {RO}, {LU}, {DK}, {CH}, {NO}, {AN}, {LI}, {IS}, {FI}, {NL}, {HU}, {BG} ExcludeNodes {US}, {CN}, {FR}, {UK}, {ES}, {IT}, {AU}, {HK}, {RU}, {PT}, {IL}, {IE}, {DE}, {CA}, {BE}, {NZ}, {PR}, {MX}, {KP}, {KR}, {GR}, {DJ}, {JP} StrictExitNodes 1 When I click on the green onion after selecting a web site, I keep getting the United Kingdom as one of my nodes. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJW9eAMAAoJEH1gNwhiMDZusekP/jXnkAkTIHEvytXkoRsPKvYv NY9DG0eX/n6nE4ufBAczoRgaZMCwF5BPlBio9CyiSlL4qiI0xZ9zqY1vV5+kIrYS cewQH62JvS2rj3DRykVytyHXrdRE+zvnhqqY0fqD/7+WehXkG9dQmu5TT8qfmS35 bw12EpVs6yyAR7Rfhnaha0D1fqK1ekOFkpi+bo6j7X6LMW6zPnWhzROZeqEakFtP slcGJlF+OIk2f2pTkYzhq5MHwollZ+bUqkljFLzvzl1HvK2lHMtLLSgnLcU/88hC 7bhJiOfkh7+jmpi+GMzoCRFGWLq75bufJ34acxap3P4bRnYduJ72RvUQ40+LITcj dNmtFTC/+psrdvjHBJP9XDO8FPhmVIOlEr588tjgOPQwDNHbe5t7TMEYk/8S5EzH +7ahYd9MbT03oNnVrQKbSut66LmuukDyIuvR8gP9UU2+VNmKubxVcsRlOQvDmIDR /zqT6nYrc7uCimE37Ny0K8v2R0NSwE/rVPZeP2i0dzgyHOkSPLitRDvkyLgDI+kr Wwn0cAkdzjs4428PdOnEyu+b2vLtXDcV3Q1aH32wQbMXR/o2uaY4VB6iVTjU6tlb bexKHehLYmaK0c0LKLb91mxjequDe4QEdJBUQg/vVvmwPzcvVBHXJgPmPf9uJ9W/ Szr3idQyUm4QZ6WvCAvD =FURP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

5 4

Who operates the bridge with nickname antirio?
by Karsten Loesing 27 Mar '16

27 Mar '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, does anybody here know who operates the bridge with nickname antirio? https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/16609212922F6F1077A1BBA299709E19F9A3F… I'm asking, because that bridge has a nice distribution of IPv4 and IPv6 clients: bridge-ip-versions v4=48,v6=64 bridge-ip-versions v4=56,v6=72 We have a bug where IPv6 addresses are included in bridge-ip-versions statistics but where consensus downloads via IPv6 addresses are not counted. It would be very valuable to test the patch for this bug on the antirio bridge or on another bridge with at least 1/2 of clients connecting via IPv6. (When looking yesterday I didn't find another bridge with that property.) The patch is commit b79d859 in my task-18460-2 branch: https://gitweb.torproject.org/karsten/tor.git/log/?h=task-18460-2 In theory it should be sufficient to cherry-pick that commit from any other recent tor branch. It just changes three lines of code. More details on the ticket: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18460 Thanks! All the best, Karsten -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJW94evAAoJEC3ESO/4X7XBs5UH/jTAcsuOl6sCJO21WuOLcMmI csq/b1IPsBvoh6YT8HBh4h07+mJSwMuWXcm3nReJsmdvjlDP4watlsEbqMgX+oxo 6GSSOX4ySS4C5bscywxXWvZIDFWPC6rToYcyfyFDmP5I+nkPNyVqsc9fBXjGJvpN uJ15bixc0iZaespKG6mQwgX8ZHi9Hf+s089voQyMEe09SscKqXHe3/50ZrLHmLPl d8BJ8Ij6WxD9ndG6FOVAUOoTunsWL8NbVSHSCJf93LOUsM6XmPjIPERyvcvnL54M uvg3kqIFTdngvLwFqzB4cETREnJtXuPIPMt8eAMLsDGtcDAuSZiqKhs1dEpJLQE= =7cQU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 2

Minimum Relay/Bridge Bandwidth
by SuperSluether 26 Mar '16

26 Mar '16

Our family recently downgraded our internet connection, which limited our upload speed to 1Mbps. According to the Tor relay doc, a minimum of 2Mbps is recommended, yet a relay is considered "fast" if it has 1Mbps. Will I be hurting more than helping if I run a relay on this connection speed? Should I run a bridge instead? SuperSluether

3 2

Weird relay outage
by Xza 26 Mar '16

26 Mar '16

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Suddenly my relay lost all it's flags plus weird bandwidth drops while the network is fully intact. Tor version 0.2.7.6 - Ubuntu server 14.04 - -- PGP : 29A4CE52 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQI4BAEBCgAiGxxEbyA8eWFuZGVyZXNvbkByaXNldXAubmV0PgUCVvaCxAAKCRBI of/XNyszStdfD/9KFIGLcxSUS0gmfHjJFPEgxHqBYunI4wSehrSve+ZcA5D66u7J FaYDaA3BB3+q2OuDsz4/3yb2ArGObkzV6sTZi4ti1zT3knU11Zw7zYvtZ7kFnfjD BFz6N7wY1tu+crrBLmM53ycyURlZxMYQieK5bpgUdz4S8WBm9LIGN1A2uV6Ifnjc Hn7cke64b0iij5QVIp0v04CjzhhxywvYqcu5U/1Z/nnxt53bGW5gtaaacz4y0fVf qFVUaBXiJR0usxoX0yvE3t+qfGVyUNAHbbB4nO3tVxQJqqaOiGcqwLoMVDCbmQlm 2ZXnbC0dgA12votJVHthZ0EGNH75+IthGic/+3LvcDoalVruohNVhXNj5WJhe5w8 J8G8KDJ+ZgnOstDwd3yJnogX0BuFB3fovopMzuWf+AJB3MVODzDbTE2md4bk1/QT If1jLLLWxhVCJJg3f7WzM1+L8glo7NUVCS6rL1DXKiFpEHP2Gw9fo8HKYxwiPar/ wvVchOL3FimbphMqKBd9o1o8CeYB9VZFUMt+cm3tfRimpotn3WNgNOWJw2Udlvpu 9l+582Vs1Y6ebZ7KfKETmsbF6iI00tA/kX9MBJu0X6TICDK31vXHR77d5HvZ1Ql6 bv7u/QBeBmGiUCy/w5utq1RZ7MxO9MDtY22dkakim4nYw8fpJL3fgWjn1g== =Bo8A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 4