-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Moritz Bartl:
On 2013-10-20 10:55, Gordon Morehouse wrote:
I suspect another user's assessment that Tor middle-node bandwidth is now abundant, and thus nodes below a certain consensus fraction are left out in the cold, may be correct. Just my hunch though.
The current routing algorithm is not utilizing low-bandwidth relays as well as it should. This is a known problem but difficult to solve. If you can provide below 10 Mbit/s, it might be better for now to go with a bridge instead (with going through the additional steps necessary to set up a 'modern' obfs2/3 bridge).
That's nearly everybody on "broadband" in the US. There are a lot of us that would rather run relays. 3, 5, 7Mbps is still reasonably respectable IMO (and provides headroom when things happen, such as botnet invasions, if those botnets send a lot of data unlike the current one). I run my bridges either piggybacked on VPSes used for other purposes, or on micro-VPS instances; I feel like my ability to offer even 3Mbps *reliably* shouldn't be overlooked.
A relevant ticket is https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/1854
Thanks for the link! :) I'll poke around and maybe make my point there. Best, - -Gordon M. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSZB6+AAoJED/jpRoe7/ujk40H/RmKhytR5MfP5/yly2yHK4cH ic9100zEjWYXkXyeNYhG/4G9CCcHatYLhEVLu22Z6ey9UeIX+9y7uce7lWjdjMCg QJ3qaR9IUPyqNS67AT3ZF+k7yrnL3fGLTvQFjaohlu/SnWiFE0duZG0OYynTaq0X 2bm0iPBK2GSoG1dkxETbgaMdQAHcBCoevdI4aPDENZvKaZASlNYKeokyeFwLgySt icRrHKU9KtpVVhFlVK6pxQHCg8qvcBrXcz1QHJJ9Gwm8pknrUYoHdxAIU//Uf3kn r4869I0HuS8vnZwmhA+pFRFRGqd2iCE0V1u0vD1ZzwEMumQnm/Irdy1i2CXSSR8= =qhrv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----