On 12/09/14 15:02, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
Hello,
I've setup a non-exit node so that I can contribute and understand the TOR network somewhat better. I've only had my node (jolexarelay1) up for a few weeks so it is still becoming a part of the network at guard status. So, as I understand my ISP, I can run an exit node if I "handle" abuse complaints to their standards. Now, since I have more idle bandwidth than idle time to "handle" complaints, I've often wondered about the reduced exit node strategy as seen at https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/ReducedExitPolicy - I'd like to allow ports in a methodical fashion such that I can test to see if a port generates complaints easily/quickly.
Hi Jeremy,
I received abuse complaints because some "bad" guys used HTTP (forum insults) and SSH (scanners) for example. I'm not sure how useful a tor exit node will be if you block http, https and ssh.
As soon as I told my hoster that I run a tor exit node, i stopped receiving these complaints, I'm sure this is not a coincidence.
My question: If I want to "try" being an exit node and add allowed exit ports slowly, does that help the network or not? For example, month 1: allow port 22, month 2: allow IRC ports, and so-on. How does the client path selection work in this case - is it smart enough to pick my exit when needed?
I think this is how tor work, if you request a connection on port XYZ it will select nodes that allow it.
Chris
Thanks for any insight, Jeremy _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays