[tor-relays] Does Setting Up a Bridge Relay Disable the Browser?

[Kenneth Freeman]

On 09/07/2015 11:17 AM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On 09/07/2015 01:07 PM, Kenneth Freeman wrote:
>> On 09/07/2015 12:18 AM, Billy Humphreys wrote:
>>> Well, people suggest that, unless you give <100KB/s, you should
>>> run a relay, not a bridge, as more relays are used (and we have
>>> Tor weather and such). You should be using Tor's daemon (apt-get
>>> install tor tor-arm) for the relay or bridge itself. -Poke
>>
>> I shall try this. If I have the bandwidth I'll run two relays, but
>> for now I'd like to run a relay and a bridge relay.
> 
> The whole point of a bridge is to provide access to Tor for people
> whose networks blacklist all normal relays, and those networks
> normally do that by IP address.  Therefore, bridges need to not be on
> the same IP address as a normal relay.  Even being in the same /24 can
> be problematic, IIUC.

Ah! Makes sense. I've been involved with Tor for at least five years
now, keeping its Wikipedia article up to date and such, but after all
this time I'm still parsing the forest from the trees.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0xDD79757F.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3129 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20150907/48d8be3e/attachment.key>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20150907/48d8be3e/attachment.sig>