[tor-relays] pinning relay keys to IPs (or not)

[Pascal Terjan]

On 26 July 2015 at 22:42, Yawning Angel <yawning at schwanenlied.me> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 22:32:18 +0100
> Pascal Terjan <pterjan at gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>> > I question the usefulness of most of the relays running on
>> > residential lines in the first place for other reasons (Eg: most
>> > consumer routers are crap, and will probably not be able to
>> > simultaneously maintain a connection to every single other relay +
>> > bridge, which is rather unhealthy to the network overall.  Being
>> > able to measure this and delist/reduce consensus weight here would
>> > be good as well.).
>>
>> It seems my relay at home is doing quite well (but my IP even if not
>> static has never changed so far so it's not very relevant to the
>> discussion).
>> It currently has 5763 open tcp connections in the tor container, 3116
>> are to my port 9001 (mix of guard and other relays I believe) and I
>> guess the 2647 others are outgoing to other relays.
>>
>> It seems the router is a
>> http://enterprise.zte.com.cn/en/products/network_lnfrastructure/cpe/broadband/201404/t20140418_422573.html
>> rebranded by my ISP and it has no problem with that amount of NAT.
>
> Grats, you have a semi-useful router.  Do you want a cookie?
>
> Anecdotal evidence that things appear to be working fine isn't all that
> helpful here.  Basically, there should be code to deal with relays
> running behind things on lists like this:
>
> https://wiki.vuze.com/w/Bad_routers#Due_to_.28too.29_many_connections

Wow that list is impressive, some of them can't handle 110 connections?!
That would indeed be very bad to use such a router, but I guess people
would notice that they can't use their connection for anything as soon
as they start a relay and would give up

> So they don't do horrible things to the network.  If your router is
> working, then great, it meets what should be a minimum standard of
> usefulness.
>