> On 18 Dec 2015, at 04:09, 12xBTM <12xbtm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Howdy, > > I'm not on the list and wish to opt-in (for future releases I suppose). > > My relay, 00C4B4731658D3B4987132A3F77100CFCB190D97 , does not fit the > criteria because it's an exit node, but my exit node does not experience > high load, and averages out at about ~60% capacity by bandwidth and <50% > by processing, so I'm interested in contributing as much as I can. Hi 12xBTM, It looks like your relay's key recently changed from 00C4B4731658D3B4987132A3F77100CFCB190D97 to CFECDDCA990E3EF7B7EC958B22441386B6B8D820. We expected some fallback churn, which is why we have 100 in the list. Changing a fallback's key has two impacts: * Clients on 0.2.8-alpha will expect the old key, and refuse to connect to your relay as a fallback directory, * In 0.2.8-rc, your relay was excluded as a fallback because the key had changed. Will you be keeping the new key for the next 2 years? If so, I'll update the fallback list with the new key, and your relay will be considered as a fallback when we next rebuild the list. Tim Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays