Hi!
I have a VPS on a 6 TB (rx + tx) per month plan.
What is most useful for the Tor network:
a) Run it at full speed for about seven days per month (AccountingMax)
or
b) Throttle network speed by setting RelayBandwidthRate and always be online?
Kind regards Tor-node.net
I've been wondering this myself, and recently found this thread: https://tor.stackexchange.com/questions/791/how-to-calculate-optimal-relay-b...
TL;DR, using AccountingMax means your relay won't be very stable because it will be idle for a certain amount of time, whereas RelayBandwidthRate will allow you to remain online at a slower speed.
Another thing to take into account is that a relay's DirPort is disabled when AccountingMax is set, so you won't be able to mirror directory information.
Personally I think throttling a relay is better for the network as a whole. I'd rather have a slow, reliable connection than a fast and spotty connection.
On 07/14/2016 01:30 PM, Tor-Node.net wrote:
Hi!
I have a VPS on a 6 TB (rx + tx) per month plan.
What is most useful for the Tor network:
a) Run it at full speed for about seven days per month (AccountingMax)
or
b) Throttle network speed by setting RelayBandwidthRate and always be online?
Kind regards Tor-node.net
tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 SuperSluether supersluether@gmail.com wrote:
Personally I think throttling a relay is better for the network as a
whole. I'd rather have a slow, reliable connection than a fast and spotty connection.
I remember arma mentioning on OFTC once that having a faster relay is preferable over a slow one that survives for longer.
On 07/14/2016 08:44 PM, SuperSluether wrote:
Personally I think throttling a relay is better for the network as a whole. I'd rather have a slow, reliable connection than a fast and spotty connection.
Hibernation using AccountingMax won't result in "spotty" client service. The relay will not accept any new connections, and thus slowly "fade out" for the period.
There is no one valid answer to this question. I would say limiting it so it stays around for 15-20 days per month is a good compromise.
How do the bandwidth authorities treat a hibernated relay? Does hibernation effectively lower the consensus weight (CW)? If so, and even if the lower CW is temporary, would it then take longer for the CW to climb back up once the relay is out of hibernation?
IMHO it seems simpler to just throttle it evenly over the month (RelayBandwidthRate). Then you have a nice, even CW throughout the month, and the relay is consistently utilized to its potential.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Moritz Bartl moritz@torservers.net wrote:
On 07/14/2016 08:44 PM, SuperSluether wrote:
Personally I think throttling a relay is better for the network as a whole. I'd rather have a slow, reliable connection than a fast and spotty connection.
Hibernation using AccountingMax won't result in "spotty" client service. The relay will not accept any new connections, and thus slowly "fade out" for the period.
There is no one valid answer to this question. I would say limiting it so it stays around for 15-20 days per month is a good compromise.
-- Moritz Bartl https://www.torservers.net/ _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
On 15 Jul 2016, at 14:03, Green Dream greendream848@gmail.com wrote:
How do the bandwidth authorities treat a hibernated relay? Does hibernation effectively lower the consensus weight (CW)? If so, and even if the lower CW is temporary, would it then take longer for the CW to climb back up once the relay is out of hibernation?
IMHO it seems simpler to just throttle it evenly over the month (RelayBandwidthRate). Then you have a nice, even CW throughout the month, and the relay is consistently utilized to its potential.
It really depends whether you want to improve client latency, or client bandwidth. Tor users tend to complain more about latency than bandwidth. So having faster relays for parts of the month is better than slower relays for the whole month. (But relays add to connection setup latency every time they are chosen when they are down, so they should only go down once per month.)
It's also worth noting that the Tor network only uses about 50% of the advertised bandwidth. But this is a good thing, because it helps reduce latency and congestion. https://metrics.torproject.org/bandwidth.html
Tim
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Moritz Bartl moritz@torservers.net wrote: On 07/14/2016 08:44 PM, SuperSluether wrote:
Personally I think throttling a relay is better for the network as a whole. I'd rather have a slow, reliable connection than a fast and spotty connection.
Hibernation using AccountingMax won't result in "spotty" client service. The relay will not accept any new connections, and thus slowly "fade out" for the period.
There is no one valid answer to this question. I would say limiting it so it stays around for 15-20 days per month is a good compromise.
-- Moritz Bartl https://www.torservers.net/ _______________________________________________ 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
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)
teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B OTR 8F39BCAC 9C9DDF9A DF5FAE48 1D7D99D4 3B406880 ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
-
Green Dream -
Moritz Bartl -
Snehan Kekre -
SuperSluether -
Tim Wilson-Brown - teor -
Tor-Node.net