Consensus Weight low when compared to Advertised Bandwidth
Hi, After having my Primcast.com dedicated server suspended, I signed up for a dedicated server from Psychz Networks in their Dallas location to run a FreeBSD-powered Tor exit relay. https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/9B6672E247BC4656915DF03A470D4... While Psychz is a bit more expensive than Primcast/ServerRoom (and that is with an special offer), I get a slightly faster server and far better customer support. One problem is that the consensus weight value is rather low in proportion to the advertised bandwidth value, when they should be approximately similar. In fact, my server's CPU usage never goes beyond 1%. Is this normal now that sbws is being deployed? Or is it bad peering on my relay? -Neel === https://www.neelc.org/
Consensus weight is no lo ger based on advertised bandwidth to prevent abuse. It is based on measured and observed actual throughput. -- Matt Westfall President & CIO ECAN Solutions, Inc. 804.592.1672 On December 16, 2019 1:30:48 PM EST, Neel Chauhan <neel@neelc.org> wrote:
Hi,
After having my Primcast.com dedicated server suspended, I signed up for a dedicated server from Psychz Networks in their Dallas location to run
a FreeBSD-powered Tor exit relay.
https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/9B6672E247BC4656915DF03A470D4...
While Psychz is a bit more expensive than Primcast/ServerRoom (and that
is with an special offer), I get a slightly faster server and far better customer support.
One problem is that the consensus weight value is rather low in proportion to the advertised bandwidth value, when they should be approximately similar.
In fact, my server's CPU usage never goes beyond 1%.
Is this normal now that sbws is being deployed? Or is it bad peering on
my relay?
-Neel
===
https://www.neelc.org/ _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 13:30:48 -0500 Neel Chauhan <neel@neelc.org> wrote:
After having my Primcast.com dedicated server suspended, I signed up for a dedicated server from Psychz Networks in their Dallas location to run a FreeBSD-powered Tor exit relay.
https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/9B6672E247BC4656915DF03A470D4...
Is this normal now that sbws is being deployed? Or is it bad peering on my relay?
If you click that, it says: "This relay appears to be less than 2 weeks old. This blog post explains the lifecycle of a new relay, and why it will not be immediately fully used to capacity." and gives a link to https://blog.torproject.org/lifecycle-new-relay That's all there's to it, just wait and see if there's still any problem after at least a month or a couple. -- With respect, Roman
Also you didn't migrate your fingerprint. So it's a new server and will take weeks if not months for the consensus weight to creep up. -- Matt Westfall President & CIO ECAN Solutions, Inc. 804.592.1672 On December 16, 2019 1:30:48 PM EST, Neel Chauhan <neel@neelc.org> wrote:
Hi,
After having my Primcast.com dedicated server suspended, I signed up for a dedicated server from Psychz Networks in their Dallas location to run
a FreeBSD-powered Tor exit relay.
https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#details/9B6672E247BC4656915DF03A470D4...
While Psychz is a bit more expensive than Primcast/ServerRoom (and that
is with an special offer), I get a slightly faster server and far better customer support.
One problem is that the consensus weight value is rather low in proportion to the advertised bandwidth value, when they should be approximately similar.
In fact, my server's CPU usage never goes beyond 1%.
Is this normal now that sbws is being deployed? Or is it bad peering on
my relay?
-Neel
===
https://www.neelc.org/ _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
participants (3)
-
Matt Westfall -
Neel Chauhan -
Roman Mamedov