Re: [tor-relays] [tor-assistants] Call for discussion: turning funding into more exit relays

[Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:43:22AM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> What constitutes a minimal useful exit policy? Mine is curently
> 
> reject 0.0.0.0/8:*
> reject 169.254.0.0/16:*
> reject 127.0.0.0/8:*
> reject 192.168.0.0/16:*
> reject 10.0.0.0/8:*
> reject 172.16.0.0/12:*
> reject 78.46.119.2:*
> accept *:22
> accept *:443
> accept *:465
> accept *:563
> accept *:992-995
> reject *:*
> 
> which doesn't give me any complaints, but also no exit
> flag. On the other hand I would love to unthrottle it
> (this is a dual-core Atom, but on 1 GBit line) as
> long as someone pays for the extra traffic (this is 
> 6.9 EUR/TByte). 

6.9 EUR * 30 TB is quite pricy. At the current plan, we could pay for
part of it, but we'd hope you, or the community around you, can pay for
the other part.

> I think there are several people in my position. So
> 
> a) what minimal exit policy would qualify us for applying for funding?

accept *:80
accept *:443
accept *:554
accept *:1755

That also happens to be enough to get you the Exit flag.

> b) when and who is the contact? Should I just talk to Zwiebelfreunde e.V.?

The contact for what? I've been coordinating potential exit relay
operators so far. Once things are up and running a bit more, I'm hoping
Tor can contract part-time to somebody and I'll hand everything to
him/her to keep it all going.

--Roger

_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays