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

Re: Reduced throughput with 0.1.1.14

To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Reduced throughput with 0.1.1.14
From: Peter Palfrader <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 23:58:09 +0100
Delivered-to: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@seul.org
Delivered-to: or-talk@seul.org
Delivery-date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 17:58:12 -0500
In-reply-to: <43FE3D82.5000005@zone.no>
Mail-followup-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0602230802080.3657@mallard.zanker.org> <20060223220946.GF17505@asteria.noreply.org> <43FE3D82.5000005@zone.no>
Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Lasse Øverlier wrote:

> 
> Not to make this a big issue but *if* you are so unfortunate that all
> the Entry Guard nodes Tor-0.1.1.14 happen to pick are slow, you also
> would get a worse throughput after this upgrade.

Having picked "bad" Entry Guards wouldn't affect your throughput as a
server.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

References:
- Reduced throughput with 0.1.1.14
  - From: Mike Zanker
- Re: Reduced throughput with 0.1.1.14
  - From: Peter Palfrader
- Re: Reduced throughput with 0.1.1.14
  - From: Lasse Øverlier

Prev by Author: Re: UTC & increased anonymity for client/node & user
Next by Author: Re: UTC & increased anonymity for client/node & user
Previous by thread: Re: Reduced throughput with 0.1.1.14
Next by thread: Re: Reduced throughput with 0.1.1.14
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread