- tor-relays - lists.torproject.org

TOR notice.log is spammed with "Certificate not yet valid" warnings
by Klaus Layer 03 Nov '11

03 Nov '11

Hi, since 0.2.3.6-alpha the logs of my instances are full of these messages: 14:56:23 [WARN] (certificate lifetime runs from Nov 3 16:15:34 2011 GMT through Nov 2 16:15:34 2012 GMT. Your time is Nov 03 13:56:23 2011 GMT.) 14:56:23 [WARN] Certificate not yet valid: is your system clock set incorrectly? Any idea how I can get rid off these warnings? Best regards, Klaus

3 3

ARM: Client locales on connections page
by Klaus Layer 23 Oct '11

23 Oct '11

Hi, I recently found the "Client locales" function on the connection page of ARM. What exactly is the number behind the country code: ir 223334 (%13) us 188412 (%11) │ it 133819 (%8 ) │ de 121516 (%7 ) │ kr 102462 (%6 ) Thanks, Klaus

2 2

TBB on same system as relay?
by Rick Huebner 21 Oct '11

21 Oct '11

I run a relay 24/7, but sometimes also want to use Tor myself as a client. Until now, I've been using the Tor Button in my normal Firefox browser to switch in and out of Tor mode as needed, but now I see that going forward, the standalone Tor Browser Bundle is the only recommended way of using Tor as a client. How can I run the TBB on my system without interfering with my relay? When I just tried it now, the TBB brought up a second Vidalia instance which then tried to command my relay's existing Tor instance instead of spawning a second one for itself. This caused it to prompt for the relay's command interface password, but I cancelled out since I suspect that allowing the TBB to interfere with my relay's Tor process would lead to Bad Things, e.g. reconfiguring its options on the fly to a client-mode config and dropping all my users. So... how do relay operators use Tor themselves, if they can't run TBB? Or is there a way to configure them to live safely together? Or have I misinterpreted the new TBB focus, and the relay bundles will continue to support use as a client in the future as they do now? I'm using Windows 7 if that matters, but I doubt it.

4 4

Metrics portal problems?
by Rick Huebner 20 Oct '11

20 Oct '11

Is the metrics portal at https://metrics.torproject.org/ partly down, or undergoing maintenance or something? I see that some of the stats don't seem to have been updated in the last week or so. Many of the graphs are truncated, e.g. https://metrics.torproject.org/users.html?graph=direct-users&start=2011-10-…, and the per-relay stats on the https://metrics.torproject.org/networkstatus.html page all seem to stop with the 2011-10-12 13:00:00.0 consensus.

2 1

How works the flag attribution?
by Ottakar 17 Oct '11

17 Oct '11

Hi people, I just start my first node, and as my English is light, many aspect of the config are mysterious for me. I just see that my node as 2 new flags: "Stable" and "Guard". Maybe someone can explain to me how this attribution works? Thanks

3 2

Questions
by francois.pasgloup＠netcmail.com 16 Oct '11

16 Oct '11

2 1

icecat
by mick 09 Oct '11

09 Oct '11

Resending because I sent from the wrong address.... Begin forwarded message: To: tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org Subject: icecat All I have now had a total of three abuse requests from the ISP hosting one of my tor nodes from a company called icecat (rip(a)icecat.biz) On the first two occasions I pointed to the notice on my server about it being a tor node and they went away. This time they are threating to null route my server if I don't do something. So reluctantly I have added a reject of 87.255.38.35:* to my exit policy. I'd be interested to hear from any other operators who have been pestered in this way about supposed abuses of icecat. Best Mick --------------------------------------------------------------------- The text file for RFC 854 contains exactly 854 lines. Do you think there is any cosmic significance in this? Douglas E Comer - Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume 1 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc854.txt ---------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Relay accounting calculations
by Steve Snyder 05 Oct '11

05 Oct '11

I'm not sure I understand how the relay accounting limit is calculated. The manual says that you might specify an AccountingMax limit of 1 GB, a ceiling that would be applied to each of the input and output traffic. The manual also says that it is known the output traffic can be larger than the input traffic, especially if you're running an exit node. (I imagine that the converse applies if you also have Tor clients on the same network, using the node, though the manual doesn't say so.) Given that the AccountingMax value applies to traffic in each direction, one would have to specify a rate that is half their actual limit. That is, given a 100GB limit one would specify "AccountingMax 50 GB" in the config file, causing the relay to sleep when 50GB is reached in either input or output traffic. Is the algorithm really this inflexible? If I reach 50GB on output traffic, with only 49GB of input traffic, that puts the relay into hibernation with 1GB of bandwidth left unused. That seems counter-intuitive to me. Is the manual inaccurate, or am I just missing the hidden genius of tracking input and output traffic as distinct pools? It seems more sensible to specify the full bandwidth allotment, with the relay hibernating when the sum of the input and output traffic reach that limit.

2 1

Hibernation timing & bandwidth
by Steve Snyder 05 Oct '11

05 Oct '11

I have a relay with a fixed monthly bandwidth limit, so I expect the relay to hibernate toward the end of the month. (I'm trying to spread the bandwidth out over the month, but actual relay utilization cannot be estimated accurately.) I'm wondering how to time this hibernation period. What I'd like to avoid is hibernating during a period when relay hibernation is common. If I know that most Accounting-limited relays hibernate at, say, the end of the calendar month, then I can schedule my hibernation to be at the start of the calendar month. If most hibernation is done on Saturday (day 6, the end of the week) then I can arrange to sleep on Wednesday (day 3). Is there a known trend to relay hibernation that I can schedule against? Thanks.

2 1

bad line
by cmeclax-sazri 05 Oct '11

05 Oct '11

You may have noticed a deterioration in my throughput over the past month. Yesterday I called my ISP, trying to figure out the problem, and was advised to put one computer directly on line and see what happens. I did this for an hour about 20:00 UTC, taking Tor and the mail server off line, and connecting just the laptop, on which I did pings. I saw 25% packet loss with no uploading or downloading (the laptop does have a Tor client, but I was not using it). Further testing with 2ping shows that the packets lost are incoming. Hopefully the problem will be resolved either early next week or the week after (I'll be out part of the week). cmeclax

1 1