Too little traffic on my #2 non-exit relay
Hey there, I'm currently running two tor (non-exit) relays on one host machine. "000000000000myTOR1" and "000000000000myTOR2". Now my problem is that tor relay #2 generates almost no traffic. https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/000000000000myTOR Log Relay #1: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 1566234/14743525 TAP, 10428/10433 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 56008 circuits open. I've sent 2167.46 GB and received 1567.97 GB. Log Relay #2: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 63/63 TAP, 1/1 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 4 circuits open. I've sent 1.58 GB and received 844.66 MB. Both have the same binary and configuration (except incoming/outgoing IPv4). I've also tried to switch from "fully self compiled debian, with custom kernel, and own tor binary" to "Out of the Box Ubuntu LTS, with torproject tor package" .. without any improvement. Both relays works as expected. OT: for my opinion avg 150 mbit/s (99% done by node #1) is too less for an Ivy-Bridge Based Xeon Quad Core (/w HT) on an unshared gigabit line. Apart from the fact that multithread support is really missing. Can anyone give me a hint, or am i just too stupid? Thanks ;)
Your #2 relay is only advertising 83.96 KB/s so it's no surprise it gets low traffic. Can it be that #1 is an old relay and #2 is relatively new? If #2 is new it needs time to ramp up traffic: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay On 2013-09-18 18:57, Christian Dietrich wrote:
Hey there,
I'm currently running two tor (non-exit) relays on one host machine. "000000000000myTOR1" and "000000000000myTOR2". Now my problem is that tor relay #2 generates almost no traffic.
https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/000000000000myTOR
Log Relay #1: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 1566234/14743525 TAP, 10428/10433 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 56008 circuits open. I've sent 2167.46 GB and received 1567.97 GB.
Log Relay #2: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 63/63 TAP, 1/1 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 4 circuits open. I've sent 1.58 GB and received 844.66 MB.
Both have the same binary and configuration (except incoming/outgoing IPv4). I've also tried to switch from "fully self compiled debian, with custom kernel, and own tor binary" to "Out of the Box Ubuntu LTS, with torproject tor package" .. without any improvement. Both relays works as expected.
OT: for my opinion avg 150 mbit/s (99% done by node #1) is too less for an Ivy-Bridge Based Xeon Quad Core (/w HT) on an unshared gigabit line. Apart from the fact that multithread support is really missing.
Can anyone give me a hint, or am i just too stupid? Thanks ;) _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Thanks, but both relays have been started at the same time. Due to the fact that they also have the same configuration, both should offer up to 1 gigabit/s bandwidth. "RelayBandwidthRate 125 MBytes RelayBandwidthBurst 125 MBytes" Both relays are exactly the same, except for the IPv4 adress.
Your #2 relay is only advertising 83.96 KB/s so it's no surprise it gets low traffic. Can it be that #1 is an old relay and #2 is relatively new? If #2 is new it needs time to ramp up traffic: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay
On 2013-09-18 18:57, Christian Dietrich wrote:
Hey there,
I'm currently running two tor (non-exit) relays on one host machine. "000000000000myTOR1" and "000000000000myTOR2". Now my problem is that tor relay #2 generates almost no traffic.
https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/000000000000myTOR
Log Relay #1: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 1566234/14743525 TAP, 10428/10433 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 56008 circuits open. I've sent 2167.46 GB and received 1567.97 GB.
Log Relay #2: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 63/63 TAP, 1/1 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 4 circuits open. I've sent 1.58 GB and received 844.66 MB.
Both have the same binary and configuration (except incoming/outgoing IPv4). I've also tried to switch from "fully self compiled debian, with custom kernel, and own tor binary" to "Out of the Box Ubuntu LTS, with torproject tor package" .. without any improvement. Both relays works as expected.
OT: for my opinion avg 150 mbit/s (99% done by node #1) is too less for an Ivy-Bridge Based Xeon Quad Core (/w HT) on an unshared gigabit line. Apart from the fact that multithread support is really missing.
Can anyone give me a hint, or am i just too stupid? Thanks ;) _______________________________________________ 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
Weird that #1 has the stable flag and #2 don't then. "Stable" -- A router is 'Stable' if it is active, and either its Weighted MTBF is at least the median for known active routers or its Weighted MTBF corresponds to at least 7 days." The above suggests that #1 has been known to the dirauths for a while (since it got stable) and #2 either restarts a lot or has not been around for long. On 2013-09-18 20:41, Christian Dietrich wrote:
Thanks, but both relays have been started at the same time. Due to the fact that they also have the same configuration, both should offer up to 1 gigabit/s bandwidth.
"RelayBandwidthRate 125 MBytes RelayBandwidthBurst 125 MBytes"
Both relays are exactly the same, except for the IPv4 adress.
Your #2 relay is only advertising 83.96 KB/s so it's no surprise it gets low traffic. Can it be that #1 is an old relay and #2 is relatively new? If #2 is new it needs time to ramp up traffic: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay
On 2013-09-18 18:57, Christian Dietrich wrote:
Hey there,
I'm currently running two tor (non-exit) relays on one host machine. "000000000000myTOR1" and "000000000000myTOR2". Now my problem is that tor relay #2 generates almost no traffic.
https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/000000000000myTOR
Log Relay #1: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 1566234/14743525 TAP, 10428/10433 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 56008 circuits open. I've sent 2167.46 GB and received 1567.97 GB.
Log Relay #2: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 63/63 TAP, 1/1 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 4 circuits open. I've sent 1.58 GB and received 844.66 MB.
Both have the same binary and configuration (except incoming/outgoing IPv4). I've also tried to switch from "fully self compiled debian, with custom kernel, and own tor binary" to "Out of the Box Ubuntu LTS, with torproject tor package" .. without any improvement. Both relays works as expected.
OT: for my opinion avg 150 mbit/s (99% done by node #1) is too less for an Ivy-Bridge Based Xeon Quad Core (/w HT) on an unshared gigabit line. Apart from the fact that multithread support is really missing.
Can anyone give me a hint, or am i just too stupid? Thanks ;) _______________________________________________ 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
Yep,weird. I've installed both at the same time, on an clean ubuntu out-of-the box system at 2013-09-11. As you can see at atlas.torproject.org #1 has been started at 2013-09-11 08:40:17 and #2 at 2013-09-11 08:40:17. @Mick: This will be solved at next restart, but i don't think the problem is caused by missing nodefamily. Thanks, Chris
Weird that #1 has the stable flag and #2 don't then. "Stable" -- A router is 'Stable' if it is active, and either its Weighted MTBF is at least the median for known active routers or its Weighted MTBF corresponds to at least 7 days." The above suggests that #1 has been known to the dirauths for a while (since it got stable) and #2 either restarts a lot or has not been around for long.
On 2013-09-18 20:41, Christian Dietrich wrote:
Thanks, but both relays have been started at the same time. Due to the fact that they also have the same configuration, both should offer up to 1 gigabit/s bandwidth.
"RelayBandwidthRate 125 MBytes RelayBandwidthBurst 125 MBytes"
Both relays are exactly the same, except for the IPv4 adress.
Your #2 relay is only advertising 83.96 KB/s so it's no surprise it gets low traffic. Can it be that #1 is an old relay and #2 is relatively new? If #2 is new it needs time to ramp up traffic: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay
On 2013-09-18 18:57, Christian Dietrich wrote:
Hey there,
I'm currently running two tor (non-exit) relays on one host machine. "000000000000myTOR1" and "000000000000myTOR2". Now my problem is that tor relay #2 generates almost no traffic.
https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/000000000000myTOR
Log Relay #1: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 1566234/14743525 TAP, 10428/10433 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 56008 circuits open. I've sent 2167.46 GB and received 1567.97 GB.
Log Relay #2: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 63/63 TAP, 1/1 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 4 circuits open. I've sent 1.58 GB and received 844.66 MB.
Both have the same binary and configuration (except incoming/outgoing IPv4). I've also tried to switch from "fully self compiled debian, with custom kernel, and own tor binary" to "Out of the Box Ubuntu LTS, with torproject tor package" .. without any improvement. Both relays works as expected.
OT: for my opinion avg 150 mbit/s (99% done by node #1) is too less for an Ivy-Bridge Based Xeon Quad Core (/w HT) on an unshared gigabit line. Apart from the fact that multithread support is really missing.
Can anyone give me a hint, or am i just too stupid? Thanks ;) _______________________________________________ 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
If you look at #2 here: https://metrics.torproject.org/relay-search.html?search=72227B12964210DE79DD... it says "Unmeasured=1". #1 does not have that. So I guess the dirauths have not gotten around to measure the real bandwidth of #2. It's still in "phase one" or "phase two" according to https://blog.torproject.org/blog/lifecycle-of-a-new-relay On 2013-09-18 20:59, Christian Dietrich wrote:
Yep,weird. I've installed both at the same time, on an clean ubuntu out-of-the box system at 2013-09-11. As you can see at atlas.torproject.org #1 has been started at 2013-09-11 08:40:17 and #2 at 2013-09-11 08:40:17.
@Mick: This will be solved at next restart, but i don't think the problem is caused by missing nodefamily.
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:41:17 +0200 Christian Dietrich <christian.d.dietrich@gmail.com> allegedly wrote:
Thanks, but both relays have been started at the same time. Due to the fact that they also have the same configuration, both should offer up to 1 gigabit/s bandwidth.
"RelayBandwidthRate 125 MBytes RelayBandwidthBurst 125 MBytes"
Both relays are exactly the same, except for the IPv4 adress.
Neither relay shows any family members. That /may/ cause a problem since they are obviously related. Mick --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 http://baldric.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 06:57:54PM +0200, Christian Dietrich wrote:
Now my problem is that tor relay #2 generates almost no traffic.
https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/000000000000myTOR
Log Relay #2: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 63/63 TAP, 1/1 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 4 circuits open. I've sent 1.58 GB and received 844.66 MB.
I spent a while debugging the bwauths, but here's the simpler problem: % telnet 5.104.107.47 443
Trying 5.104.107.47...
I (and thus moria1, and thus moria1's bwauth) can't reach your relay. You can see the various votes in http://freehaven.net/~arma/moria1-v3-status-votes moria1, dizum, dannenberg, tor26 can't reach it. Faravahar, gabelmoo, maatuska, urras, turtles can. So it has just enough Running votes to make it into the consensus, but maatuska is the only bwauth that can reach it. Routing / firewalling / something else problem? --Roger
hehe, thanks :) I've also checked this but my ip was reachable from my test ips. I've now checked it with host-tracker dot com and told it my server hoster. They now have fixed the problem. - Christian 2013/9/19 Roger Dingledine <arma@mit.edu>
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 06:57:54PM +0200, Christian Dietrich wrote:
Now my problem is that tor relay #2 generates almost no traffic.
https://atlas.torproject.org/#search/000000000000myTOR
Log Relay #2: Circuit handshake stats since last time: 63/63 TAP, 1/1 NTor. Heartbeat: Tor's uptime is 7 days 6:00 hours, with 4 circuits open. I've sent 1.58 GB and received 844.66 MB.
I spent a while debugging the bwauths, but here's the simpler problem:
% telnet 5.104.107.47 443
Trying 5.104.107.47...
I (and thus moria1, and thus moria1's bwauth) can't reach your relay.
You can see the various votes in http://freehaven.net/~arma/moria1-v3-status-votes
moria1, dizum, dannenberg, tor26 can't reach it.
Faravahar, gabelmoo, maatuska, urras, turtles can.
So it has just enough Running votes to make it into the consensus, but maatuska is the only bwauth that can reach it.
Routing / firewalling / something else problem?
--Roger
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
participants (4)
-
Christian Dietrich -
Logforme -
mick -
Roger Dingledine