[tor-relays] Relay Consensus Low

[teor]

Hi,

> On 2 Jun 2019, at 16:57, Matt Westfall <mwestfall at ecansol.com> wrote:
> 
> Hey toer, I actually removed the Bandwidth Rates per another suggestion.

You might need to wait a week or two for the new setting to increase your
bandwidth. It takes a few days for the bandwidth authorities to measure
the whole network.

> Just sucks I can donate more to the TOR Network, but because other people abused the advertised bandwidth settings now it is what it is.

I'm sorry, but Comcast's peering is the problem here, not Tor.

Tor clients choose random relays, regardless of their location. So we
need to measure how well your relay connects to the rest of the world.

Lots of relay operators expect Tor to use all their bandwidth. But Tor is
low-latency, so it should never use all a relay's bandwidth. (10% is ideal,
30% is typical, any more than that causes lots of latency for clients.)

There's a detailed explanation on this wiki page:

https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/MyRelayIsSlow#WhyRelayLoadVaries

> Also I guess the fact that most of the traffic across tor is http/https It's not ever going to "observe" a whole lot because it's quick small packets of data.

Tor Browser regularly downloads 100MB+ updates over Tor. And people use Tor for
other bulk downloads.

And remember: clients choose relays at random, so all relays see a similar mix
of small and large downloads.

> I moved it to another IP and put it on 443 / 80 so maybe that will help cause firewalls and such.  It's also directly on a public wan IP now, so firewall/router complications.

If you keep your relay stable for a few weeks, it will probably get the Guard
flag again. Relays with the Guard flag get more traffic.

> I didn't see if anyone answered if I need a separate IP or if I can create another tor instance on different ports but on the same IP, to increase the load I'm handling.

You can create 2 relays per IPv4 address:

>> On 27 May 2019, at 11:54, Igor Mitrofanov <igor.n.mitrofanov at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Matt, if you only have 1 host, it may be more beneficial to create 2
>> relays on it (or more than 2 - if you have more than 1 IPv4 address
>> available) using tor-instance-create. You could be hitting the limits
>> of what a single CPU core can do.

Even if your relay isn't used much for client traffic, it still works well as
a directory mirror for relay and onion service information.

If you'd like Tor to use more of your traffic, and your relay will be on the
same address and port for the next 2 years, you can sign up as a fallback
directory mirror:
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2019-May/017321.html

Since you just changed your relay port, your relay won't be included in the
June 2019 list. But we'll do another list in 6-12 months.

T
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20190602/63b04b2d/attachment.sig>