On 09/07/16 11:54, Farid Joubbi wrote: > I had not thought of the diversity that way. There's a host of diversity issues with Tor to cover, but I tend to think OS diversity is one of the more critical. These are some reports we generate at TDP: https://torbsd.github.io/dirty-stats.html > > Thanks for pointing it out. > > > I am still interested in the subject though, if anyone has any > specific examples of some kind of general rules of why one OS usually > performs better than some other OS as a tor relay... > There's lots of factors to consider once one is using similar hardware, the same bandwidth and pipes, etc. The ultimate difficulty in doing a test comparison is creating identical scenarios. Tor is a more or less random anonymity routing network, which breaks any notion of repeatability. This piece makes a general case pretty clearly: http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2732268 However, the FreeBSD networking stack is known to be extremely fast and optimized. OpenBSD is built to be secure by default, so many default knobs are aimed at keeping a live system secure. The most obvious parameter to adjust is kern.maxfiles in the sysctls. Certainly both are underrepresented in the Tor public network... .but we're working on it. . . > I realize that I might not get any good answers since my question is > kind of broad and unspecific. Clearly you are asking the right questions, which is what's critical IMHO. Not directing to the OP, but I also strongly think one should stick with the OS they are most comfortable in administering, regardless of diversity questions. If someone's never used a Unix-like system before, and can't manage to edit a file with vi(1), start elsewhere :) g -- 5F77 765E 40D6 5340 A0F5 3401 4997 FF11 A86F 44E2
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays