Re: Bittorrent

[Praedor Atrebates <praedor@xxxxxxxxx>]

As a relay, it would be quite easy to never ever see full utilization.  The main limiting factor would be entry nodes, or more likely, exit nodes.  The number of exit nodes are MUCH lower than the number of relays so while your system may see little traffic, the exit nodes could easily be maxed out.

On Tuesday 17 February 2009 04:00:57 Scott Bennett wrote:
>      On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 08:40:23 +0000 sigi <tornode@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 09:21:30AM +0100, Marco Bonetti wrote:
> >> On Mon, February 16, 2009 22:17, Ted Smith wrote:
> >> > Yes, I believe the proper way to do so is to use Tor as the tracker
> >> > proxy, but conduct actual data transfer "in the clear". Or at least,
> >> > that's what I've seen on this list in the past. Would anyone like to
> >> > correct me?
> >> 
> >> it's also possible to run an "all-torified" bittorrent swarm (both peers
> >> and tracker) and more, see the instructions on the azureus site:
> >> http://azureus.sourceforge.net/doc/AnonBT/Tor/howto_0.5.htm
> > 
> >You definitely shouldn't do that, since the tor-network is not capable 
> >of such a huge traffic-amount through P2P with bittorrent these days. 
> >
> >By downloading with bittorrent via Tor, you take away the bandwidth 
> >from the people who really need it for browsing the web safely.  
> >
>      Really?  I know that seems to be in accord with the received wisdom
> on this list, but I, for one, no longer make that assumption.  For one thing,
> my node spends most of the time handling somewhere between 15% and 50% of its
> proven data rate capacity.  Occasionally it may sustain on the order of 70%
> or 75% for up to a few minutes at a time.  Also, the torstatus page now
> frequently shows many more nodes that have peaked at over 5,000 KB/s (14 the



-- 
"An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics."
--Plutarch