That was exactly my point, thank you Anemoi. This is the case all over the world, not just in Germany. Unfortunately there seems to be a culture of shooting the messenger here, or accusing him of being “aggressive”, “accusatory”, “claiming entitlement” or (my favorite) “lacking programming skills”, in addition to politely phrased suggestions to ditch my relay and pay for a VPS with a fixed IP.
The idea of running a volunteer based network for public good is to use every possible resource offered by volunteers, and if DirAuth algorithms need to be adapted for this, such proposal should be taken seriously. I for one am positive that a huge amount of bandwidth that could have been be donated, is lost this way.
If this does not make technical sense (which I doubt but I may be wrong), rephrasing the guidelines and officially saying on the Tor page that operators behind dynamic IP are only welcome if they run bridges would be fine – but this isn’t not the case as of now. I hope Tor developers or whoever runs the Tor project are reading this.
From: tor-relays [mailto:tor-relays-bounces@
lists.torproject.org ] On Behalf Of anemoi@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2016 9:24 PM
To: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] Unwarranted discrimination of relays with dynamic IP
In Germany, it's quite usual that you have a dynamic IP and unusual that you have static IP. Not just a few relays are located in Germany. It's not just a question of frustration of owners of dynamic IP relay, but also a matter of bandwith waste. If Tor cannot handle dynamic IPs properly a lot of bandwith is not used. And bandwith is something that the Tor network can not get enough of.
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor- relays
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays