[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-relays] automation needs of big relay ops (implemented as ansible role)
- To: Nusenu <nusenu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, David Stainton <dstainton415@xxxxxxxxx>, arzhel@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [tor-relays] automation needs of big relay ops (implemented as ansible role)
- From: Moritz Bartl <moritz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 23:31:03 +0100
- Authentication-results: mail.headstrong.de (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) reason="pass (just generated, assumed good)" header.d=headstrong.de
- Cc: tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 17:31:16 -0500
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=headstrong.de; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type :in-reply-to:references:subject:subject:mime-version:from:from :date:date:message-id:received; s=mail; t=1424212263; x= 1426026664; bh=lSIJhG4jOp3y+22YPEHHcojyW2Ls89Dm7g7nUSPpaoE=; b=Z utKvznS0uNQKFkb3XUS/KAVza/DzbKiZhLPAw5kiWzIoYmMt5XceXQJDf3/JSpR1 gyWXRmyJseJYrQwXBRL/aiFq4e/QLNP0B3uf/sdXZRBwxbcVhq5yxgyBy5GtcQz3 PtYUrWjsHL/EyWS7PI9GZx8ocU+6ATLEBN4o+QJMi0=
- In-reply-to: <54E3BFD5.40608@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- 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>
- References: <54E22F82.4070904@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CAFN1edqqgSw-Qym2tK1FCoEw+jnXtExPESWg6DrgCdezfjzsJA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <54E261A8.5050100@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CAFN1edoROpNok6ZCkAaxTjMQrqG_wD_+d=w_W4-RoCWOLYkqUg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <54E37A81.9060904@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <54E3B9E2.8080808@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <54E3BFD5.40608@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: "tor-relays" <tor-relays-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 02/17/2015 11:25 PM, Nusenu wrote:
> I'm wondering if simply (blindly) running two tor processes per
> available IP is any worse than anything else from a pure "lets push as
> much traffic as we can" (on a host not on a tor process level).
I don't see a problem with that either, unless the destination is CPU or
memory constrained.
We have (and had) servers with 16 IPs -- Dual Core, 2-4GB RAM, 100
Mbit/s and less. Maybe not too nice to spin up 32 Tor relays on such
machines? But I think in general it is fair to go with "2 per IP", and
expect the server to be configured to listen on a sane number of IPs.
--
Moritz Bartl
https://www.torservers.net/
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays