Hi Renke,
Do you care to elaborate ? If you need assistance we can talk via private mail as well ...
Bandwidth consumption is very low as you possible read on the project site. Do you run the test with scamper and or did you turn down the scanning speed ?
The question remains why did many relay ops canceled the test before completion. As the scoreboard shows most of them would have completed the test in the estimated lowest time frame (around 4 days). The estimated max. time is about 24 days not 96 if you choose to run with traceroute and the default values instead of scamper.
My best guess is that even 4 days was too long. After the test was started they wondered how long it would take and checked back with the faq, then decided to quit. Call it a hunch ;-)
My system, as an example, took about 2 days and 23 hours to complete the run. I use scamper with the default settings. You can also turn up the pps value and finish even faster.
How long will this take?:
http://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html#q-howlong
How much bandwidth, disk space, RAM, and CPU will this consume?:
http://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html#q-howmanyresource...
-- Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Sincerely yours
Sebastian Urbach
---------------------------------------------- Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. ---------------------------------------------- Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Inventor, journalist, printer, diplomat, and statesman
I am wondering why only 68 out of 283 completed the traceroute. Can someone explain please? probably because the estimated time is between 4 and 96 days:
https://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html#q-howlong my (low-bandwith) relay is trace-routing since 4 days and completed a mere 15 % of all checks :)
Renke
On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 16:04:01 +0100 Sebastian Urbach sebastian@urbach.org allegedly wrote:
My system, as an example, took about 2 days and 23 hours to complete the run. I use scamper with the default settings. You can also turn up the pps value and finish even faster.
How long will this take?:
http://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html#q-howlong
How much bandwidth, disk space, RAM, and CPU will this consume?:
http://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html#q-howmanyresource...
Fo info, my relay (512MB RAM, 1 core VPS) finshed the scamper run (with default settings) in just over 3.5 days. I've just kicked off a second run.
Mick ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 http://baldric.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Mick,
Thank you for running multiple turns and your time frame info as well :-) -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Sincerely yours
Sebastian Urbach
---------------------------------------------- Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. ---------------------------------------------- Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Inventor, journalist, printer, diplomat, and statesman
On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 16:04:01 +0100 Sebastian Urbach sebastian@urbach.org allegedly wrote:
My system, as an example, took about 2 days and 23 hours to complete the run. I use scamper with the default settings. You can also turn up the pps value and finish even faster. How long will this take?: http://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html#q-howlong How much bandwidth, disk space, RAM, and CPU will this consume?: http://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html#q-howmanyresource...
Fo info, my relay (512MB RAM, 1 core VPS) finshed the scamper run (with default settings) in just over 3.5 days. I've just kicked off a second run.
Mick ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 http://baldric.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I am wondering why only 68 out of 283 completed the traceroute. Can
someone
explain please?
I would like to mention that though we received data from 283 different IPs, it doesn't mean that there are 283 unique relays some of the relays use dynamic IPs so over time they send data from more than one IP.
Thanks
Anupam
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Sebastian Urbach sebastian@urbach.orgwrote:
Hi Mick,
Thank you for running multiple turns and your time frame info as well :-)
-- Mit freundlichen Grüssen / Sincerely yours
Sebastian Urbach
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Inventor, journalist, printer, diplomat, and statesman
On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 16:04:01 +0100 Sebastian Urbach sebastian@urbach.org allegedly wrote:
My system, as an example, took about 2 days and 23 hours to complete the run. I use scamper with the default settings. You can also turn up the pps value and finish even faster. How long will this take?: http://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html#q-howlong How much bandwidth, disk space, RAM, and CPU will this consume?: http://web.engr.illinois.edu/~das17/tor-traceroute_v1.html# q-howmanyresources
Fo info, my relay (512MB RAM, 1 core VPS) finshed the scamper run
(with default settings) in just over 3.5 days. I've just kicked off a second run.
Mick
Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 http://baldric.net
tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Sebastian,
Do you care to elaborate ? If you need assistance we can talk via private mail as well ...
I use the script intentionally with scamper restricted to 200 pps - not sure why (and what) I should elaborate ;)
The needed time (even for the default of scamper with 1000 pps) is imho a rather good explanation to torland's question why only 68 of nearly 300 participating IPs finished the whole measurement at least once.
Renke
On Sunday 26 January 2014 16:27:12 renke brausse wrote:
The needed time (even for the default of scamper with 1000 pps) is imho a rather good explanation to torland's question why only 68 of nearly 300 participating IPs finished the whole measurement at least once.
I launched the script from a high capacity tor relay host as well as from a VPS. I did not see a big difference in time. On both it finished within around 4 days.
I would assume that someone who reads the documents/FAQ about the script, checks it and starts it, will not kill it before it finishes. So I am wondering if there is another reason for the high number of unfinished script cycles.
Regards,
torland
So I went through the data collected from the relays I
Ips used #relays 1 88 13 1 149 1 2 2 28 1 3 1 4 1 5 2
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 2:53 PM, tor-admin tor-admin@torland.me wrote:
On Sunday 26 January 2014 16:27:12 renke brausse wrote:
The needed time (even for the default of scamper with 1000 pps) is imho a rather good explanation to torland's question why only 68 of nearly 300 participating IPs finished the whole measurement at least once.
I launched the script from a high capacity tor relay host as well as from a VPS. I did not see a big difference in time. On both it finished within around 4 days.
I would assume that someone who reads the documents/FAQ about the script, checks it and starts it, will not kill it before it finishes. So I am wondering if there is another reason for the high number of unfinished script cycles.
Regards,
torland _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
Sorry for the previous incomplete email. So as I was saying I found the following IPs per relays in our collected data-
IPs-used #relays 1 88 13 1 149 1 2 2 28 1 3 1 4 1 5 1
Total IPs =294 (2 more than what you see on the scoreboard because of some previous initial test runs executed by others).
So we can say roughly 96 relays participated with 68 of them finishing.
Thanks
Anupam
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Anupam Das anupam009@gmail.com wrote:
So I went through the data collected from the relays I
Ips used #relays 1 88 13 1 149 1 2 2 28 1 3 1 4 1 5 2
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 2:53 PM, tor-admin tor-admin@torland.me wrote:
On Sunday 26 January 2014 16:27:12 renke brausse wrote:
The needed time (even for the default of scamper with 1000 pps) is imho a rather good explanation to torland's question why only 68 of nearly 300 participating IPs finished the whole measurement at least once.
I launched the script from a high capacity tor relay host as well as from a VPS. I did not see a big difference in time. On both it finished within around 4 days.
I would assume that someone who reads the documents/FAQ about the script, checks it and starts it, will not kill it before it finishes. So I am wondering if there is another reason for the high number of unfinished script cycles.
Regards,
torland _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
-
Anupam Das -
mick -
renke brausse -
Sebastian Urbach -
tor-admin