[tor-relays] Slow relay speeds for Australian geographic location(s)

[teor]

On 12 Oct 2014, at 18:06 , tor-relays-request at lists.torproject.org wrote:
> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 18:06:42 +1100
> From: Mathew <wired.kid at gmail.com>
> To: tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Slow relay speeds for Australian geographic
> 	location(s)
> 
> Thanks for the in depth post, Teor. I had read the lifecycle article but
> was concerned when people were posting that their relay was soaking all
> their bandwidth after a day or two. This makes sense now, given the
> oversupply and location. It was also worrying when the advertised bandwidth
> was fluctuating so much and was only advertising a fraction of what
> actually is available.
> 
> The Windows server is using very minimal resources at the moment, and TCP
> connections are around 250. The router will definitely be able to handle
> the load, I run a pfSense APU.
> 
> TPG doesn't have any bandwidth constraints specifically. They run a lot of
> their own infrastructure including their own undersea PPC-1 cable
> https://www.tpg.com.au/about/networks.php. No connection is ever shaped by
> TPG and I have unlimited bandwidth.
> 
> Amsterdam - http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3825961515
> LA - http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3825963543
> Boston - http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3825964878
> London - http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3825966771
> 
> So you think it isn't detecting all of my available bandwidth due to
> distance and location and such? Is it just one of those things?
> 
> torrc http://pastebin.com/GcTswhQx

Actually, I think it's a matter of waiting on a stable IP and network connection for a month or two.
(Your torrc looks fine.)

I was just trying to list all possible factors, however unlikely.

The instability is likely due to the bandwidth authorities (there's only a small number, which doesn't help stability). It will stabilise over time. But I don't think your overall level is caused by the authorities.

Now that I think about it, as far as I recall, the "observed bandwidth" is a notional figure, not an actual bandwidth measurement. Because middle relays are in oversupply, their bandwidths get weighted down. (My middle relays are listed at about 50% of their advertised/link bandwidth.)

Australian middle relays that are getting similar results to yours are:
Aquinas
DC5E2202E0148A53379F68A04207E04FFA7B4B2D (default) - Windows 8
terranullius - Windows 8
CoD

Australian middle relays that are getting almost their exact advertised bandwidth:
Serversaurus

If you can pick the difference, I'm sure we'd be glad to know why!


teor
pgp 0xABFED1AC
hkp://pgp.mit.edu/
https://gist.github.com/teor2345/d033b8ce0a99adbc89c5
http://0bin.net/paste/Mu92kPyphK0bqmbA#Zvt3gzMrSCAwDN6GKsUk7Q8G-eG+Y+BLpe7wtmU66Mx



-------------- 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/20141012/96d2a8ce/attachment.sig>