Authdir is rejecting routers in this range
Hi all, I rented a dedicated server to run a tor relay (100Mbit/s) to contribute to the network. On this machine, tor gives messages like these on startup: http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '<...>'. Please correct. The server is hosted with https://fdcservers.net/. Did I just get unlucky in picking a provider? Is there a way to check these things before spending money on setup + monthly fees? Best regards, Davíð
Yes, it's very likely that that FDCservers is getting rejected, because they have been doing a lot of bad things too tor the last months (the relay early attack was hosted in an ip range at them, and yesterday i heard something else on this mailing list about FDCservers doing weird pings to a server On 2014-08-29 23:51, Davíð Steinn Geirsson wrote:
Hi all,
I rented a dedicated server to run a tor relay (100Mbit/s) to contribute to the network. On this machine, tor gives messages like these on startup:
http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '<...>'. Please correct.
The server is hosted with https://fdcservers.net/.
Did I just get unlucky in picking a provider? Is there a way to check these things before spending money on setup + monthly fees?
Best regards, Davíð
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 09:51:33PM +0000, Davíð Steinn Geirsson wrote:
I rented a dedicated server to run a tor relay (100Mbit/s) to contribute to the network. On this machine, tor gives messages like these on startup:
http status 400 ("Authdir is rejecting routers in this range.") response from dirserver '<...>'. Please correct.
The server is hosted with https://fdcservers.net/.
Did I just get unlucky in picking a provider? Is there a way to check these things before spending money on setup + monthly fees?
Yeah, 50.7/16 and 204.45/16 were where the Sybil relays came from: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tor-security-advisory-relay-early-traffic-c... We were rejecting all relays from these subnets for a while. But then I removed that config from moria1 and asked some of the other directory authority operators to re-allow them too, since the attacking relays are long gone. Looks like not enough of them have done so. I'll ask them again. Thanks, --Roger
Why only one relay on a whole server? I was thinking of doing the same but because on a dedicated server mulitple relays and exits would be more economical than the same number of VPSs. Robert
On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 14:29:48 -0800 I <beatthebastards@inbox.com> wrote:
Why only one relay on a whole server?
I was thinking of doing the same but because on a dedicated server mulitple relays and exits would be more economical than the same number of VPSs.
What benefit would there be in running more than one relay, if the bottleneck is network speed instead of CPU?
Robert
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
I <beatthebastards@inbox.com> wrote:
Why only one relay on a whole server?
I was thinking of doing the same but because on a dedicated server mulitple relays and exits would be more economical than the same number of VPSs.
Robert
David wrote:
What benefit would there be in running more than one relay, if the bottleneck is network speed instead of CPU?
True. I presumed the speed and volume of data came with it. What is the most useful way to spend for Tor is my question. Robert
participants (4)
-
Davíð Steinn Geirsson -
I -
justaguy -
Roger Dingledine