cheers guys.. thanks for the tips, I removed the bridged_relay=1 and tor is functioning how I originally expected -a On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 23:25 -0600, John Brooks wrote: > There isn't really a trust issue involved. It does take some time to > get most clients to know you (generally not more than a day, I > believe) and the stable flag will help quite a bit. You should > probably check your ports etc, and look at your node on one of the tor > monitoring sites (http://torstatus.kgprog.com/) to make sure that > everything there is okay. Mine tends to use it's full allotted > bandwidth (250 KB/s) constantly (in the realm of 20-40gb per day), but > it's got a good stable history, handles exit traffic, and is marked as > guard (which is an automated process). > > Check to make sure that incoming connections are working and so forth > - that'd be my first guess. > > - John > On Fri, 2008-08-08 at 08:54 +0200, Marco Bonetti wrote: > On Thu, August 7, 2008 21:04, Austin wrote: > > Hello, I started running a tor bridged relay a few days ago. > If you set up as a bridge instead of a standard middleman only, I > think > it's ok: users have to known of you existence via the usual bridge > request > method as you don't appear in the node lists. > > You've a pretty good bandwith, if you are concerned about not using it > try > to switch to middleman (or to exit) and do directory information > mirroring > too. > > And thanks for adding a new node :) >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part