That stinks. Linode has the same policy WRT exit relays. If they get too many abuse complaints, they ask you to stop running a relay. The way US law is structured, I can't actually blame them for this. However they don't care if you're running a middle node. Your bandwidth/VPS, your call. A *lot* of people run bridge nodes there, myself included. -Chris (Running an exit relay in the US cost effectively seems quite difficult) On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:51 AM, mick <mbm@rlogin.net> wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jul 2013 10:49:46 -0400 Tom Ritter <tom@ritter.vg> allegedly wrote:
Sending this out, as I suspect I am not the only person running a node on SiteValley, as they have pretty good bandwidth for pretty cheap.
I had inquired in the beginning if they allowed Tor, and they said yes, but if we get too many abuse complaints we'll shut it down. So maybe 4 or 5 abuse complaints later they did indeed give me the ultimatum to shut it down or get shut down. So I made them give me a new IP address, and made it into a middle node. (The new IP was because I was thinking of making it a bridge.)
Hmm. Pretty crummy AUP. And /very/ crummy treatment of a customer.
I wonder if we are going to see more of this sort of thing now. I think the tor network needs greater geographic diversity.
Mick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 http://baldric.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
-- Christopher Patti - Geek At Large | GTalk: cpatti@gmail.com | AIM: chrisfeohpatti | P: (260) 54PATTI "Technology challenges art, art inspires technology." - John Lasseter, Pixar