Re: [tor-relays] My Relay speed has dropped nearly to zero - Why?
On 10/19/2013 06:00 AM, tor-relays-request@lists.torproject.org wrote:
Message: 3 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 00:55:42 -0400 From: Torop <torop@optonline.net> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org Subject: Re: [tor-relays] My Relay speed has dropped nearly to zero - Why? Message-ID: <526210CE.80409@optonline.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 10/18/2013 11:46 PM, David Carlson wrote:
On October 8 something caused my non-exit relay speed to drop from around 50 KB to less than 10 KB according to Atlas graphs. I have checked with my ISP and run speed tests that verify my upload speed to be .96 Mb and download to be over 3 Mb, as they have been for years. I am running Tor 0.2.4.17-rc on Windows 7 and my consensus weight has dropped to 26. What could have caused this?
Same here. See the below and do the math on how much data I was and am now pushing per 24 hours, as well as open circuits.
Oct 07 09:04:41.242 uptime 15 days 22:00 hours, 791 circuits open. I've sent 55.41 GB and received 57.06 GB. Oct 08 09:04:41.237 uptime 16 days 22:00 hours, 1255 circuits open. I've sent 63.95 GB and received 65.80 GB.
Oct 17 23:04:41.236 uptime 26 days 12:00 hours, 87 circuits open. I've sent 90.08 GB and received 92.16 GB. Oct 18 23:04:41.259 uptime 27 days 12:00 hours, 87 circuits open. I've sent 91.85 GB and received 93.96 GB. I've been seeing the same. My bandwidth limit is around 3 MB/sec, but it's been consistently at 400-600 KB/sec. I don't think it started that early for me though, not sure though. I was going to blame it on psad, but I can't see any evidence of that. The fact that all three of us experience this is interesting.
Jesse V.
I saw something that could explain what's going on, from what I've seen on a Tor relay on my home connection. If the amount of available bandwith is not very huge (~80kB/s for example), when the relay become an Exit Node, the difference of used bandwith is very huge. For me, the used bandwith of the Non-Exit relay was, during several days, approaching 0 (but was really better few days ago), but as soon as it became an Exit Relay, every available kilobyte/s were used, sometimes during the entire day. When I did the same with a very fast node (~10MB/s) I didn't seen any difference of bandwith usage : the machine is still working at (the same) full capacity. Maybe it could be explained by the fact that there is "far" (I guess but I don't know) far enough bandwith for entry and midle nodes (they are not the congestionned part of the Tor network), but it's not the same for Exit Nodes. So Tor users probably rarely connect to a low bandwith relay when several high capacity relays can take more clients. (this guess is what leads me to set my "ElectronLibre" home relay as Exit Node and 2 other fast servers also). ----- Mail original ----- De: "Jesse Victors" <jvictors@jessevictors.com> À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org Envoyé: Dimanche 20 Octobre 2013 01:13:55 Objet: Re: [tor-relays] My Relay speed has dropped nearly to zero - Why? On 10/19/2013 06:00 AM, tor-relays-request@lists.torproject.org wrote:
Message: 3 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 00:55:42 -0400 From: Torop <torop@optonline.net> To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org Subject: Re: [tor-relays] My Relay speed has dropped nearly to zero - Why? Message-ID: <526210CE.80409@optonline.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 10/18/2013 11:46 PM, David Carlson wrote:
On October 8 something caused my non-exit relay speed to drop from around 50 KB to less than 10 KB according to Atlas graphs. I have checked with my ISP and run speed tests that verify my upload speed to be .96 Mb and download to be over 3 Mb, as they have been for years. I am running Tor 0.2.4.17-rc on Windows 7 and my consensus weight has dropped to 26. What could have caused this?
Same here. See the below and do the math on how much data I was and am now pushing per 24 hours, as well as open circuits.
Oct 07 09:04:41.242 uptime 15 days 22:00 hours, 791 circuits open. I've sent 55.41 GB and received 57.06 GB. Oct 08 09:04:41.237 uptime 16 days 22:00 hours, 1255 circuits open. I've sent 63.95 GB and received 65.80 GB.
Oct 17 23:04:41.236 uptime 26 days 12:00 hours, 87 circuits open. I've sent 90.08 GB and received 92.16 GB. Oct 18 23:04:41.259 uptime 27 days 12:00 hours, 87 circuits open. I've sent 91.85 GB and received 93.96 GB. I've been seeing the same. My bandwidth limit is around 3 MB/sec, but it's been consistently at 400-600 KB/sec. I don't think it started that early for me though, not sure though. I was going to blame it on psad, but I can't see any evidence of that. The fact that all three of us experience this is interesting.
Jesse V. _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Jesse Victors:
On 10/18/2013 11:46 PM, David Carlson wrote:
On October 8 something caused my non-exit relay speed to drop from around 50 KB to less than 10 KB according to Atlas graphs. I have checked with my ISP and run speed tests that verify my upload speed to be .96 Mb and download to be over 3 Mb, as they have been for years. I am running Tor 0.2.4.17-rc on Windows 7 and my consensus weight has dropped to 26. What could have caused this?
Same here. See the below and do the math on how much data I was and am now pushing per 24 hours, as well as open circuits.
Oct 07 09:04:41.242 uptime 15 days 22:00 hours, 791 circuits open. I've sent 55.41 GB and received 57.06 GB. Oct 08 09:04:41.237 uptime 16 days 22:00 hours, 1255 circuits open. I've sent 63.95 GB and received 65.80 GB.
Oct 17 23:04:41.236 uptime 26 days 12:00 hours, 87 circuits open. I've sent 90.08 GB and received 92.16 GB. Oct 18 23:04:41.259 uptime 27 days 12:00 hours, 87 circuits open. I've sent 91.85 GB and received 93.96 GB.
I've seen very similar logs (with occasional fluctuations upward, pushing much more traffic for a short time) on my Pi relay, which is struggling to get its Stable flag back. :( I just figured it was the lack of the Stable flag.
I've been seeing the same. My bandwidth limit is around 3 MB/sec, but it's been consistently at 400-600 KB/sec. I don't think it started that early for me though, not sure though. I was going to blame it on psad, but I can't see any evidence of that. The fact that all three of us experience this is interesting.
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. I also wonder if this behavior is non-optimal. I'd prefer a better spread of traffic to nodes above some absolute floor (mainly to avoid well-meaning people on DSL connections with 128Kbps outbound, heh). I can push a couple hundred KB/sec very reliably - that ought to be worth something. If nothing else, cutting traffic to near zero on slower-but-not-glacial nodes is problematic for a couple reasons: 1. If the operators are also using them as their entry point to Tor, it might make them more vulnerable to traffic analysis, since there's less "cover" traffic (just my hunch) 2. It may discourage node operators with very usable bandwidth, and cause them to shut down their relays. In the future, those relays may become very necessary. Best, - -Gordon M. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSZBj6AAoJED/jpRoe7/uj284H/0TToHzf1s4a+Wbh5He2/ZNR AJt/OFS9t8ncQCS9rUuxVD2O+sUAr0Y00PUFNPMhYuuSnmxWaxa3AHdcaRv+HjMD 5k53Ho7sfLA2cmFsfogPAQrPSpg2GdMjCTg8wCqEvnQv4lJ2NDQ8VHkWjXLTifIq qYtkK3k9Ie8NTe8u594d9YR8ki/RI6VEg0GlFwaLoWf7oeHFz2Cl8oZI8pL7cirR fj9Jor9Vksr6z058uSADByMM/eYTPPA078opZOMFL47dNe6tNK+k+jRTO8zZSt0j u2lv23V4TvEqreKKTC/TQwK909hX5L6gsbHiOeuZn0umFKZjnr6XYME1sJQPtcc= =AGcz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
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). A relevant ticket is https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/1854 -- Moritz Bartl https://www.torservers.net/
-----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-----
On 2013-10-20 11:19, Gordon Morehouse wrote:
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
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.
There's no "point" to be made. Everyone agrees that Tor should be able to utilize slow relays better, but there is no final protocol redesign yet that achieves that. -- Moritz Bartl https://www.torservers.net/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Moritz Bartl:
On 2013-10-20 11:19, Gordon Morehouse wrote:
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
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.
There's no "point" to be made. Everyone agrees that Tor should be able to utilize slow relays better, but there is no final protocol redesign yet that achieves that.
s/make my point/add my input/ Best, - -Gordon M. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJSZJOEAAoJED/jpRoe7/ujS2kH/3r8bkE9ltvXXh+MMJSKIQiy C3w6KyHywKXL9cy32UYCAZQRn1gPOwbsux4mO4aCuNtKSBqY+QynRRfXPcIgLrXl NsE8v2JqyuOYXm/iHHeCZt79KT5+GrIyAVufr5GHHw0g5MUWz64Kuh8nXgPSu2nD HTUNh8VdmHPLptg7gqrOqCAXdFvzklEZKHkwfPOTy00Ugtwl4RQClIEiWfBOUy9q Ej78VtIKcceH6331z3FJKqtiCsaefQGSeLLwugcaiBFClkDPQV3San0DM/V1/VKo tDp1rnKnT01E+12ppomNOy3zP7K7u0zQ5ckBQj8Du+ACYfTa6ARJAWpUEa8pze0= =Mzu/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:08:52AM -0700, Moritz Bartl wrote:
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
Actually, I think relays less than 10mbit can still be useful. Back in July I suggested that 800kbit was a good cutoff: https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2013-July/002255.html but of course faster is still better. Also, everybody should remember that a relay that uses all its bandwidth is harming the network as well as helping it, because every byte that hits the rate limiting necessarily means a delay for the user. I'm a huge fan of a network where no relays are ever full. Keep an eye on https://metrics.torproject.org/network.html#bandwidth or to blow it up more, https://metrics.torproject.org/network.html?graph=bandwidth&start=2011-07-24... As that purple line continues to grow, we're going to be happy we have a bit of spare capacity currently. --Roger
participants (5)
-
Gordon Morehouse -
Jesse Victors -
julien.robin28＠free.fr -
Moritz Bartl -
Roger Dingledine