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

Re: [tor-relays] bwauth graph for August 2015

To: tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] bwauth graph for August 2015
From: starlight.2015q3@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:19:32 -0400
Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:24:36 -0400
List-archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/>
List-help: <mailto:tor-relays-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-id: "support and questions about running Tor relays \(exit, non-exit, bridge\)" <tor-relays.lists.torproject.org>
List-post: <mailto:tor-relays@lists.torproject.org>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays>, <mailto:tor-relays-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-relays>, <mailto:tor-relays-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply-to: tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: "tor-relays" <tor-relays-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

In addition to reducing Unmeasured=1 relays
from ~350 to ~150, the combination of the
new Torflow release and addition of the
Faravahar BWauth have dramatically improved
the reliability and stability of bandwidth
measurements of relays, for both the
individual BWauth values and consensus values.

This shows up most clearly in the 3-month
and 1-year Atlas graphs of consensus
weights.

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

Prev by Author: Re: [tor-relays] Bots, love 'em or hate 'em?
Next by Author: Re: [tor-relays] No guard flag?
Previous by thread: [tor-relays] bwauth graph for August 2015
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread