[tor-relays] Question on running bridge nodes

teor teor2345 at gmail.com
Sun Oct 12 01:04:50 UTC 2014

On 12 Oct 2014, at 09:32 , tor-relays-request at lists.torproject.org wrote:
> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:25:47 +0100
> From: Tor externet co uk <tor at externet.co.uk>
> To: tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> Subject: [tor-relays] Question on running bridge nodes
> Message-ID: <49c1abc0aa88e1bf8425fdc8e482402d at nodataavailable.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
> Hi,
> I've set up a bridge node in the previous few weeks, but have had to put 
> a bandwidth limit on, as I only have 10TB of traffic per month before my 
> ISP will start throttling me to 100k/sec.
> I wondered whether it was more helpful to the Tor network as a whole to 
> have have a very fast node which hibernated every 12-15 hours, or if I 
> throttled Tor traffic, so that the node was more stable.
> I'll confess that I'm far more au fait with the politics of Tor than I 
> am of the exact ins and outs of how the technology works. Any help would 
> be gratefully received.
> Thanks
> L

For relays, where pathing is quite dynamic, we recommend speed + hibernation over uptime.

But for bridges, users obtain only 3 bridge descriptors at a time, usually via some difficult or dangerous method. We'd want to make sure at least 1 stays up at all times (2 for reliability), which would favour throttling.

pgp 0xABFED1AC

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20141012/01dc036f/attachment.sig>

More information about the tor-relays mailing list