Re: Searching for "good" ISPs

[wuiv yccwg <wuivyccwg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 20 February 2010 01:43, Ted Smith <teddks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 17:32 -0800, coderman wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 4:22 PM, wuiv yccwg <wuivyccwg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > ...
>> >  Basically, I am after some feedback and maybe a wish list or
>> > suggestions. What Tor community would like to see in such kind of
>> > service provider?
>>
>> Tor is a decentralized architecture. why use Tor in your centralized
>> (even if distributed) network?
>>
>> based on your description a one or two hop VPN service would fit the
>> needs of your customers and design nicely. attempting to use Tor in
>> such a configuration would only mislead your users about the potential
>> privacy and security that could be afforded.
>>
>> perhaps i have misunderstood the nature of your "hosted Tor service".
>
> One of the services they offer is VPN access to an entry node that's
> local to the VPN - this simulates a two-hop Tor proxy.
>
> But what the main subject of the email was, it seems, was their new
> service which allows people to host Tor nodes. The implication being
> that they are a "good" ISP/Tor host.
>

Yes, exactly. It is basically the idea to be a "good" tor host, among
other things.

I believe that presence of such 'potentially' concentrated Tor
subnetworks would be beneficial to the network because:

1. It would simplify running high bandwidth tor servers for not
technically minded people.

2. It would add bandwidth capacity to the network. We could scale it
up to tens, even hundreds Gbps if there is demand.

3. The network still stays fairly distributed, thanks to /16 hack, and
careful use of Family configuration options.

4. Users get more options. As with using VPN to get to the same box
running the EntryNode. Someone wants to trade some anonymity for speed
by trading down to effectively 2 hop scheme. They would get this
_option_. Not everyone needs a bulletproof anonymity. Some people just
want to have some anonymity to simply prevent ISP's selling their
clickstreams, for example. Just good Internet hygiene.

5. Eventually, once Tor gets more popular, which I think quite likely.
Particularly, if it gets quicker. This kind of networks could grow in
something similar to today's bandwidth exchanges like LINX LONAR LIPEX
and such, but in Tor network.

6. With growth of Tor network it will inevitably gravitate to a
topology which minimises cost of bandwidth anyway.


just a thought...
***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk    in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/