- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

A little bedtime story about relays and OVH
by tor＠gmx.info 25 Jan '14

25 Jan '14

3 3

How effective is "NumCPUs"?
by Alexander Dietrich 25 Jan '14

25 Jan '14

Hello, a relay I'm running is currently at about 0.80 load average. It has a dual-core CPU and I have configured "NumCPUs 2". I'm still in the process of finding the bandwidth limit. Should I keep increasing "RelayBandwidthRate" on the single Tor process, or is it a better idea to start a second process? (Also, does a second process need its own identity, or can it use the existing one?) Best regards, Alexander -- PGP Key: 0xC55A356B | https://dietrich.cx/pgp

8 8

Re: [tor-relays] Would be good if Tor were more multithreaded.
by tor＠t-3.net 24 Jan '14

24 Jan '14

I've added "numCPUs 2" to torrc and restarted via the init script. It does not seem to have made a difference. I presume that's where/how it should have been added? The FAQ says it doesn't do multi-core well. Seems unfortunate - multi-core is everywhere, now. On 01/24/2014 07:41 PM, Sebastian Urbach wrote:> Hi, > > Did you consider the numCPUs option ? > -- > Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Sincerely yours > > Sebastian Urbach > > ---------------------------------------------- > Those who would give up essential Liberty, > to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve > neither Liberty nor Safety. > ---------------------------------------------- > Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Inventor, > journalist, printer, diplomat, and statesman > > > > Here's where top hangs out on Libero. Seems it would be a better situation > if Tor would actually use the second core. > > top - 12:05:07 up 5 days, 21:35, 1 user, load average: 0.33, 0.43, 0.34 > Tasks: 130 total, 2 running, 128 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie > Cpu0 : 47.2%us, 21.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 17.6%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 13.8%si, 0.3%st > Cpu1 : 0.0%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st > Mem: 1914136k total, 718704k used, 1195432k free, 139588k buffers > Swap: 3981304k total, 0k used, 3981304k free, 116320k cached > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND > 1340 _tor 20 0 566m 224m 36m R 71.7 12.0 6168:37 tor > 9887 nobody 20 0 21644 13m 892 S 7.3 0.7 0:31.85 scamper > 9889 root 20 0 102m 916 772 S 0.7 0.0 0:02.80 sed > 9921 root 20 0 15028 1312 992 R 0.3 0.1 0:00.19 top > 1 root 20 0 19232 1480 1212 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.27 init > 2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd > > > > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > > > > >

1 0

Would be good if Tor were more multithreaded.
by tor＠t-3.net 24 Jan '14

24 Jan '14

Here's where top hangs out on Libero. Seems it would be a better situation if Tor would actually use the second core. top - 12:05:07 up 5 days, 21:35, 1 user, load average: 0.33, 0.43, 0.34 Tasks: 130 total, 2 running, 128 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu0 : 47.2%us, 21.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 17.6%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 13.8%si, 0.3%st Cpu1 : 0.0%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 1914136k total, 718704k used, 1195432k free, 139588k buffers Swap: 3981304k total, 0k used, 3981304k free, 116320k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 1340 _tor 20 0 566m 224m 36m R 71.7 12.0 6168:37 tor 9887 nobody 20 0 21644 13m 892 S 7.3 0.7 0:31.85 scamper 9889 root 20 0 102m 916 772 S 0.7 0.0 0:02.80 sed 9921 root 20 0 15028 1312 992 R 0.3 0.1 0:00.19 top 1 root 20 0 19232 1480 1212 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.27 init 2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd

3 2

Trying Trusted Tor Traceroutes
by Sebastian Urbach 24 Jan '14

24 Jan '14

Dear list members, Some relay operators asked if it would be useful to run the script multiple times on the same system. The short answer is yes. It was unclear if enough operators would be willing to help with the script even one time. No one expected that there would be operators who like to do more than one run :-) Thats awesome ! Multiple runs could show temporal routing changes and therefore valuable new information. The value for multiple runs will be implemented into the live scoreboard within reasonable time. Thank you very much for participating ! You want to help ? Visit the project: http://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Sincerely yours Sebastian Urbach ---------------------------------------------- Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. ---------------------------------------------- Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Inventor, journalist, printer, diplomat, and statesman

1 0

How effective is "NumCPUs"?
by Sebastian Urbach 24 Jan '14

24 Jan '14

Hi Alexander A Tor daemon running with numCPU2s is better than a single daermon on each core because there is less "overhead". You can also get a great boost by enabling AES-NI hardware encryption if you don't have it already ... This is the best docu available afaik: https://www.torservers.net/wiki/setup/server#aes-ni_crypto_acceleration -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Sincerely yours Sebastian Urbach ---------------------------------------------- Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. ---------------------------------------------- Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Inventor, journalist, printer, diplomat, and statesman Hello, a relay I'm running is currently at about 0.80 load average. It has a dual-core CPU and I have configured "NumCPUs 2". I'm still in the process of finding the bandwidth limit. Should I keep increasing "RelayBandwidthRate" on the single Tor process, or is it a better idea to start a second process? (Also, does a second process need its own identity, or can it use the existing one?) Best regards, Alexander -- PGP Key: 0xC55A356B | https://dietrich.cx/pgp _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 0

Starting deep browsing
by Gints Gabalins 23 Jan '14

23 Jan '14

So I just started using Tor and I`m getting "The connection has timed out" It doesnt look like I can set up a relay,any hints would be awesome.Thanks in advance.

2 1

[Question] Onion router's bandwidth
by hyoseok Lee 23 Jan '14

23 Jan '14

Hi I am junior student in Sungkyunkwan University,South Korea I am studying Tor for my paper In my research, onion router has to report its bandwidth by sending descriptor to authority directory. and then authority directory verifies onion router's bandwidth [Question 1] I hope to know the way how authority directory verifies bandwidth which came from onion router. I was told that authority directory had bandwidth verifying tool called bandwidth scanner. How can I get source code of bandwidth scanner ? [Question 2] I made my own onion router, I configured my onion router's bandwidth 100kB/s But, In updated cached-microdesc-consensus file, My onion router's bandwidth was estimated at 20kB/s and there is "unmeasured=1" It means my onion router's bandwidth had not been estimated. what is difference between measured router and unmeasured router ? Thank you for reading my question

2 1

Trying Trusted Tor Traceroutes
by Anupam Das 22 Jan '14

22 Jan '14

Dear Tor relay operators, We have recently received a good rate of participation by relay operators to our measurement project. To give everyone an idea of the current participation rate we have hosted a live scoreboard of all our participants, available at http://128.174.241.211:443/relay_scoreboard The live scoreboard highlights all the IPs from which we received traceroute results along with the current status of the script running in their machine. The live scorebaord also summarizes the participation by the top Tor Families and the top guard and exit relays. We thank all the relay operators who have participated and hope more relay operators will participate soon. Thanks Anupam

8 10

bandwidth authority algorithm is cracked
by starlight.2014q1＠binnacle.cx 22 Jan '14

22 Jan '14

The bandwidth authorities assign all kinds of wildly incorrect capacities to the Tor node here. The Tor relay software has been up for 45 days and has not been down for more than five minutes for three or four months. Occasional outages from the ISP mucking with their network, but nothing more than ten or fifteen minutes in any week. The local node bandwidth calculation is consistently 490-495 Kbytes/sec. Very stable. Very consistent. The Tor bandwidth authorities assign values anywhere from 100 Kbytes/sec to almost 700 Kbytes/sec in an oscillating pattern with a period of about one week. Something is seriously wrong with that.

6 10