Re: [tor-relays] Inconsistent BW measurements of unused relay

[teor <teor2345@xxxxxxxxx>]

> On 10 Dec. 2016, at 07:12, Rana <ranaventures@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> My relay remains severely under-used. One thing that bothers me are inconsistent bandwidth measurements. Here they are:
>  
>  
> Atlas “advertised” (which is actually supposed to be “measured”?:   100 KB/s =                                 ~ 800,000 bit/s

This is the minimum of:
* the bandwidth rate,
* the bandwidth burst, and
* the observed bandwidth (the maximum bandwidth your relay has recently
  sustained over a 10 second period).
* the consensus weight, converted to a bandwidth figure (I think?).

If you hover over the figure in atlas, it will break it down for you.

> “I have sent” reported in Tor log: on the average pretty stable 17 mbytes every 6 hours =               ~ 200 bit/s

This is what your relay has actually sent.

> Atlas graphs:  1 Kbytes/s  on the average                                                                                                      ~ 8,000 bit/s

This is the value that your relay reports it has sent.
It is rounded and averaged to preserve client privacy.

> Consensus BW: 26 =                                                                                                                                           ~ 26,000 bit/s

This is the low-median of the measurements of the 5 bandwidth
authorities. It is a dimensionless figure that only makes sense when
compared with other relay consensus weights.

(It is not measured in kilobytes per second, although since the input
values are kilobytes per second, it can sometimes be comparable.)

> Average upload bw reported by arm: 100 kb/s =                                                                                         ~ 100,000 bit/s

I suspect this is actually kilobytes, and is the same as the atlas
figure. (They use the same backend library.)

> Makes zero sense.

Yes, it can be very confusing.
Each of these figures measures a different thing.
They are made for different purposes.

Other than that, I'll repeat what I said the last time you asked this
question, in:
https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2016-December/011111.html

> I don't know your relay's fingerprint, so I can only repeat the
> general advice I have given others with similar questions:
> 
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2016-November/010913.html
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2016-November/010928.html
> https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2016-November/010916.html

T

-- 
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org
------------------------------------------------------------------------



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