[tor-relays] Re: Interest in sharing a IPv4 /24 across a datacenter provider?

[Tor at 1AEO via tor-relays <tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, that's a great suggestion! I've adjusted the subject line to match new topic.

If anybody is interested in sharing, please reach out. I should have a few IPv4 /24 coming online over the next few weeks.

On Monday, February 24th, 2025 at 4:26 AM, boldsuck via tor-relays <tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Saturday, 22 February 2025 06:49 Tor at 1AEO via tor-relays wrote:
> 
> > > > https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#search/185.220.101.
> > > > We are 5 relay orgs sharing a /24. would be nice if you share the subnet
> > > > with 1-2 other relay operators.
> > > > Logistically, how do you or how would you recommend to share a /24 across
> > > > more than 1 organization? Lots of ideas / questions ...
> > > > Are they required to be in the same data center and/or same rack and/or
> > > > nearby data centers with a dedicated/private connection? Different servers
> > > > next to each other?
> 
> 
> Whether the servers need to be in one rack or data center depends on the
> provider’s backbone. There are providers who have several locations/data
> centers internally networked. But the most practical and safest way is to
> share a e.g. 1/4 rack:
> https://www.myloc.de/en/colocation/rack/quarter-rack.html
> 
> > Router locally doing BGP for something like a /26 to specific servers or
> > statically mapping /26 to specific server ports?
> > 
> > Doesn't seem possible via BGP to share a /24 across internet connections due
> > to the limit on needing to be a /24 for default-free zone...
> 
> 
> That was the reason for my statement. You can't BGP advertise smaler than /24
> And hardly anyone can afford a 10G, 40G or 100G connection or several petabytes
> of traffic per month.
> 
> We have divided a /24 into /27 which are routed. One AS and each /27 is
> individually RIPE ASSIGNED PA
> 
> > On Wednesday, July 10th, 2024 at 6:27 AM, lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <lists@for-
> 
> privacy.net> wrote:
> 
> > > On Mittwoch, 10. Juli 2024 00:32:04 CEST Osservatorio Nessuno via
> > > tor-relays>
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > we are planning to get some hardware to run a physical Tor exit node,
> > > > starting with a 1Gbps dedicated, unmetered uplink (10Gbps downlink). We
> > > > will also route a /24 on it, so we will have large availability of
> > > > addresses to run multiple instances. We have been running a few exit
> > > > nodes so far, but never on our own hardware.
> > > 
> > > Your bottleneck is the 1G uplink.
> > > For comparison, I have 2x Xeon E5-2680v2 10C/20T and 256Gb RAM
> > > 2x 10G nic (LACP bond) and I can not achieve 10G throughput with it.
> > > As a rule of thumb, I would always count one instance per thread or core.
> > > I have 40T and 40 tor exit instances.
> > > 
> > > F3Netze has specified the hardware in Contact info:
> > > https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#search/185.220.100.
> > > 
> > > > Which is the bandwith limit per core/Tore instance? Or what can we
> > > > expect to be the bottleneck?
> > > 
> > > That depends on the CPU clock speed. Fast Ryzen or Epyc's can do 50-70
> > > MiB/s per core/instance.
> > > 
> > > > Due to some other requirements we need for some experiments (SFP ports,
> > > > coreboot support, etc) we can mainly choose between these 2 CPUs:
> > > > Intel i5-1235U
> > > > Intel i7-1255U
> > > > 
> > > > The cost between the two models is significant enough in our case to
> > > > pick the i7 only if it's really useful.
> > > > 
> > > > In both cases with 32GB of DDR5 RAM (we can max to 64 if needed, but is
> > > > it?).
> > > > 
> > > > Should this allow us to saturate the uplink?
> > > 
> > > Guards need more resources than exits since the introduction of
> > > congestion-
> > > control and because of DDoS I would use 64GB RAM for a guard.
> > > With your IP space and 1G uplink, I would take the i5 with 32Gb, save the
> > > money and maybe add a second server later. Or if you build the hardware
> > > yourself, look for a used Epyc or Ryzen server. 16 or 32 core with high
> > > base clock. Used server hardware from the data center is like new.
> > > 
> > > > To summarize, with this bandwith, this hardware and a /24 how many Tor
> > > > exit nodes should be ideal to run considering that each of them could
> > > > have their own address?
> > > 
> > > https://metrics.torproject.org/rs.html#search/185.220.101.
> > > We are 5 relay orgs sharing a /24. Currently 5x 2x10G(or 25G)
> > > With now 8 relays per IP, over 2000 instances can run in a /24 subnet. It
> > > would be nice if you share the subnet with 1-2 other relay operators.
> > > 
> > > --
> > > ╰_╯ Ciao Marco!
> > > 
> > > Debian GNU/Linux
> > > 
> > > It's free software and it gives you
> > > freedom!_______________________________________________ tor-relays
> > > mailing list
> > > tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ╰_╯ Ciao Marco!
> 
> Debian GNU/Linux
> 
> It's free software and it gives you freedom!_______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list -- tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe send an email to tor-relays-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list -- tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to tor-relays-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx