Re: [tor-relays] Consensus Weight calculation

[Vort <vvort@xxxxxxxxx>]

>> Windows does not limit connection count for processes and users.
>> There are also no system-wide limit for sockets.
>> Except for available dynamic port range (1025-64510 on my computer).

> Depending on your Windows version, the limit may be around 2000-4000,
> check this article:
> http://smallvoid.com/article/winnt-tcpip-max-limit.html

1. This article is from year 2004. Most described parameters are
  removed on modern systems.

2. Available port range on my computer is 64510 - 1025 = 63485 ports.
  But this limits only outbound connection count. Inbound connection
  count is unlimited.
  https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms739169(v=vs.85).aspx :
  "The Microsoft Winsock provider limits the maximum number of sockets
  supported only by available memory on the local computer."

3. Half-open connections limit, mentioned in article, was removed
  starting from Windows 7.


> You should also check how many connections your relay is actually
> making.

Jun 28 01:30:51.000 [notice] Since startup, we have initiated 0 v1 connections, 0 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 384 v4 connections; and received 26 v1 connections, 0 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 639 v4 connections.
Jun 28 07:30:51.000 [notice] Since startup, we have initiated 0 v1 connections, 0 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 664 v4 connections; and received 46 v1 connections, 0 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 1200 v4 connections.
Jun 28 13:30:51.000 [notice] Since startup, we have initiated 0 v1 connections, 0 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 725 v4 connections; and received 63 v1 connections, 1 v2 connections, 0 v3 connections, and 1469 v4 connections.


> Ok, so if your relay is in the 16MB bucket, it should be measured
> at at least 200 after a few weeks. But it's hard to tell which
> bucket each relay is in, that depends on the bandwidth authority.

If my relay resurrects, that would be great.
But more important goal is to prevent the possibility of such stuck.
Instead of + 1 MiB/s this can yield + 1 GiB/s.


> That might unstick your relay.
> We need to know if this happens, because it helps us to know what to do
> to fix stuck relays.

Yes, it can.
Some relays are already unstuck (9FC2673BB2704C2AAB851F8334938565DF1D0819,
  143BC876D403003FBEF2AA843942DC4D248E3872 for example).
But some stuck even deeper (B918EB3FA4D03A4F9F632AA17F217A6C04044EF7,
  BD4354E76929C90B7004FF149A3C52189A3B4634).
So my fear is that routers are get unstuck at the expense of some getting stuck.
If this is not the case, that is great!


> We are working on it a few different ways:
> * increasing the minimum bandwidth authority file size
> * making an automatic process to un-stick stuck relays
> * getting more bandwidth authorities in more places
> * re-writing the bandwidth authority code

I saw some changes and was wondering if they are random or not.
Thanks for your work.


-- Vort

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