[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

[tor-relays] Re: Guidance on optimal Tor relay server configurations - Maximum 360 Tor relays allowed?



On Friday, 21 March 2025 13:53 Tor at 1AEO wrote:

> Some clarification questions:
> 
> How best to find out these 20% and 10% values at any point, especially as
> they fluctuate?

https://nusenu.github.io/OrNetStats

> Can you say more about the expected "big issue" of arti and family keys?

Bigger families and arti is multicore aware. With one or a few IPs and instances, you can achieve 10G.
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/40837

> When are they expected to arrive?

Surprise :-) suddenly there after many years:
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/torspec/-/blob/main/proposals/321-happy-families.md
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/merge_requests/857

Quetzalcoatl can begin

> How did relayon know they were 25% of exit cw?
https://nusenu.github.io/OrNetStats/relayon.org.html
https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/40007

> How did they go about splitting IPs?
Split into /26 and /27 and routed to the servers.

> It'd be great for it to update more often than monthly but seems best way
> to view cw compared to no alternative?
> On Monday, March 10th, 2025 at 7:34 AM, boldsuck via tor-relays <tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 9 March 2025 22:59 Tor at 1AEO via tor-relays wrote:
> > > New constraint - any guidance? Math seem right?
> > > All relay operators / families are limited to a maximum of ~360 Tor
> > > relays:
> > > https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor/-/issues/40837 I'll likely
> > > create an account to reply on the gitlab ticket too since looks like
> > > different audience than those replying here.
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately, if the Tor network isn't efficient in using the bandwidth
> > > across ~4 x 10 Gbps servers then this limit will be reached, hindering
> > > known good operators, while not stopping malicious operators who don't
> > > follow the rules. Least efficient, ~512 CPU threads / relays for 4 x 10
> > > Gbps (128 threads/relays per 1 x 10 Gbps server). Most efficient, ~320
> > > CPU
> > > threads / relays for 4 x 10 Gbps (80 threads/relays per 1 x 10 Gbps
> > > server).
> > > 
> > > Today, optimize Tor relay for the ~360 constraints:
> > > 1) Maximize bandwidth per CPU thread/core/relay with higher CPU base
> > > clock
> > > 2) Other hardware: Ensure sufficient RAM per Tor relays (4GB to 1 CPu
> > > thread) and good NIC. 3) Maximize network peering / routing strategies
> > > for
> > > Tor?
> > > Anything else?
> > 
> > With so many relays per Family/Operator you also reach the 20% and 10%
> > limits and /16.
> > And you have to be able to pay the bandwidth costs. A 10G relay does
> > 100TB/day and several PB per month.
> > 
> > > For #3, how best to optimize network routing / peering strategies for
> > > Tor
> > > relays? This email thread was optimizing around CPU threads and RAM but
> > > having plenty of CPU threads and RAM that might be insufficient with a
> > > poor
> > > network routing/peering strategy for Tor? Is there a reasonable way or
> > > some
> > > reliable way to quickly (less than a few months of running the relays)
> > > get
> > > in the correct range of how well the Tor network uses a specific
> > > server's
> > > available bandwidth? Ex: Route hops / ping times to directory /
> > > bandwidth
> > > authorities, confirming well known upstream providers (Cogent, etc.),
> > > and/or something else? Best strategy is month-to-month renting servers
> > > and
> > > running relays rather than signing 5 year contracts to end up somewhere
> > > with poor peering/routing for Tor?
> > 
> > The Tor network is a dynamic massive network and bandwidth contributions
> > and overall consensus weight are constantly changing. When a larger
> > operator (like NTH or RWTH Aachen) goes up or down everything changes.
> > In addition, the Tor network team and DirAuth's may change consensus rules
> > at any time.
> > 
> > Diversity is important and that relays and bridges are running at all. How
> > big an operator can be will also be a big issue when Arti and Family keys
> > arrive. Because relayon reached 25% exit cw, the IPs were split between
> > several orgs.
> > 
> > --
> > ╰_╯ 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


-- 
╰_╯ Ciao Marco!

Debian GNU/Linux

It's free software and it gives you freedom!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list -- tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to tor-relays-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx