Indeed, Julien.
As a matter of fact I saw the server (using the Tor network) pushing up to 8.8MB/s at some point while I was using it as a proxy in my setup. That was yesterday. As soon as I closed the SocksListenAddress I was connecting to, it went back to almost not existent cos' it is weighted 10. Even the Fast flag isn't there. As I said, I'm waiting to see if it picks up relevance in the next day or so.
On 2014-11-04 14:26, Julien ROBIN wrote:
Hi Rafael, On Tor Atlas after a little time offset, your download seems now to appear into your server stats. https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 Your Advertised Bandwidth seems now to be better : 866.83 KB/s But the consensus weight is still at 10 (it's like zero) for now (let's wait less that one day) In the following hours, we will see if the "consensus weight" value can be better thanks to that (so then true clients will start using the bandwidth and nourish your advertised bandwith). If I remember well what I read before, the consensus weight, when recalculated, is the result of your Advertised Bandwidth multiplied by a coefficient obtained by bw authorites (when periodically testing your server). If it's congestionned, the test gives low result and your consensus weight is reduced. If it's really good, your consensus weight is increased (and your server usage too). If your consensus weight is stuck at 10 and doesn't increase, it would mean that bw authorities cannot test your server and always gives "zero" as coefficient (if so, you will have to check everything on your network : router, softwares, etc) The answer is near :) ----- Mail original ----- De: "Rafael Rodriguez" <rafaelr@icctek.com> À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org Envoyé: Lundi 3 Novembre 2014 22:04:24 Objet: Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends. Hi Julien, Thanks for the tip. I did ssh'd tunnel into my Tor server and I can pull downloads at 1-2MB/s as expected. I do not see my server getting any better in measurements though. After 4 days running my Advertised Bandwidth is barely 62kb/s and its Consensus Weight is 10. I wouldn't mind as long as it serves our Tor community but I'm under the impression that something is just not quite right. This box was put in place specifically to put all its bandwidth to good use and help the network. I have the feeling that a Relay measured at such low speeds does more harm than good to the network. I will keep it up there running as it is since I cannot pinpoint a problem at this time and maybe it just needs to stay online for a longer period of time. --- On 2014-11-02 07:29, Julien ROBIN wrote: It strange you still haven't any used bandwidth https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 I cannot explain you why but I have an idea for you in order to "kickstart" your bandwidth usage. A tor process used to relay traffic also have the possibility to be used as client. If it's at home, it's easy (socks v5 at 127.0.0.1:9050 if you haven't changed anything), if your relay isn't at home, use SSH tunnelling to do so (SSH session brings you to "localhost" on your remote computer, on the port you choose) Try to download something through your relay, if nothing changed, even the "client" bandwidth will be able to raise your advertised and used bandwidth as server, in order for your server to "start" having weight on the network. Once "started", everything should be automatic but normally, the start is also automatic after 2 or 3 days, so it is strange. May be it's because of the oversupply of "middle nodes" on the network (there is so much middle nodes that most of them - the slowers - probably keep totally unused). Without the guard flag (and it needs enough bandwidth) your relay cannot be used as entry guard right now. Good luck ! ----- Mail original ----- De: "Rafael Rodriguez" < rafaelr@icctek.com > À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org Envoyé: Samedi 1 Novembre 2014 16:16:24 Objet: Re: [tor-relays] Bwauths Measures question, friends. Maybe I should just wait longer but the 3 days unmetered has obviously been passed already. That's why I'm asking about bwauths measurements. I was under the impression that after 3 days bwauths adjust your consensus weight and raises your bandwidth estimate. In this case, the server is simply capped at 20kb/s still while my "advertise bandwidth" is little over 50kb/s. Since I have a 2MB/s relay, I'm expecting to see at least over 100kb/s or 250kb/s measurements to make my relay a usable one. Yet the advertised speed hasn't changed. Is that normal and should I just give it more time? That's what I'm trying to understand. On 2014-11-01 07:00, Krbusek Christian wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 You may want to read the following, which should make this more clear. https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay Cheers Am 01.11.2014 um 10:46 schrieb Rafael Rodriguez: Anyone knows how often bwauths measures a relay? I don't understand why directory authorities have not lifted the 20KB cap for my older relay. Now I have doubts if it could be a problem with my server. This is a 2MB/s relay with burst of 4MB/s to start tuning it and increase it later if stable, which is not being used and has been running for over 3 days. Is it normal for Relays to take longer than three days to start getting at least some traffic and for directory authorities to lift the 20KB cap? Fingerprint 48ADFCC561402D7EBB1CDE233F206B01D8FA0765 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUVL1GAAoJECgP5Pn8Zk3/cfoQAI9bMRyx8hl3B+V+vSLC7xoJ sfQedgt15LRyJ/+Ru3tQaPDPOkleTKR3rCnKaDiRCmjxibWt4liRUBji2nzDPFJU dcD0kEXqCA/H3jyIJWvKnkxvzUfAjCZ7Y7b16sGsJSgVfZ8UFin52loTDgjSz7zU tgsqsOBIHT72gr/hbxRBzr3ZP8LZqTDA5baoLFAxnYyxIQwK5eRefI6zMP9cuiOA FL4I60Tige+TBp8kDnyKdYosxRJFkkAJN3YCuHuewIgoV0pD/xkScEscYgqp+CWu cMQkj5NDDMP/I5ZXw2a64Etq33Hc4SzEm4HvKquu05pS2QgClXu7pg8z2u1BCdPQ 7uMZRyKfAnOOwITKVxsKXT5XJySFJXskMLgupLtp3iEA24GfLJTax0pa7xmOeEbb nvt2kGdrKvAl3t4PgwvtwuFmfJoqXzjxWMJJRD2s3hXi0TS4WC1y1pccw+INXKsG 7sV+dHhqDPwOHpFleHv4RG207Kx6P8+hbNjdeVI8iEelAhKoPfcUJDM/A4aa2ahd GB+vZrnuInJlZJeg+hL28Xk1pOxwHtq046nhLosVY7YNDW6CHoD5aruWeQdCT1y5 AFZ/xqOP+XPWMYj/UJLhWoBFTjYjSUZuxi5c4nGpKoK/OSc1GCZERx8Ec7mJrN2R lzlnW4uBh7M+pvMrhRWl =rF5K -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays