Re: [tor-relays] Fast Exit Node Operators - ISP in US

[Mirimir <mirimir@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/24/2014 03:06 AM, s7r wrote:
> If the only limit is consumed monthly traffic, and not the bandwidth
> your relays consumes daily (e.g. you use your VPS only for Tor) it is
> not recommended  to use RelayBandwidthRate. Better use AccountingMax,
> and your relay will work at full speed until it hits the accounting
> limit, then go into hibernation. It will wake up at a random time in
> the next accounting period.
> 
> As the Tor manual says, it's better to have a fast relay available
> some of the time instead of having a slow relay available all the time.
> 
> Just use AccountingMax and do not forget there are other factors as
> well which count in the speed of a relay, such as CPU, RAM, network -
> a VPS (share resources machine) is unlikely to achieve maximum
> resources usage. Give it a try with AccountingMax (so you are sure it
> won't bypass the limit set by your provider and you don't have to pay
> extra) and see what what speed it reaches.

OK, then. But in that case, and given that the provider states the
throughput limit as "1000 GB per month", I would want to use monthly
accounting, in order to be in synch with them:

AccountingStart month 1 00:00
AccountingMax 900 GBytes

Yes? That way, with no RelayBandwidthRate limit, relay utilization will
presumably increase for two or three months, until AccountingMax is
exceeded, and the relay hibernates. Subsequently, it will tend toward an
equilibrium, with some mix of bandwidth and activity/month that depends
on the configuration of the directory authorities.

If I used daily accounting, the relay might end up hibernating every
day. That would be worse, right? Also, I'm imagining that this might
lead to lower average throughput, because the relay would show up as
unstable? Is that correct?

More generally, should AccountingStart (day vs week vs month) match the
accounting period used by the service provider?

Thanks.

> On 11/24/2014 5:24 AM, Mirimir wrote:
>> On 11/23/2014 11:05 AM, s7r wrote:
>>> That is, because in almost all cases, providers allow unmetered 
>>> incoming traffic to your server but keep count and accounting on 
>>> outgoing traffic from your server, which is why the torrc setting
>>> acts the way it does.
> 
>> That would be great! I'll confirm with the provider.
> 
>> I'm also wondering what to set for RelayBandwidthRate for an exit.
>> I see some old threads on this list, and a question at Tor.SE, but
>> find nothing that's clear and persuasive.
> 
>> Assuming that the 1000 GB/mo limit applies to just outgoing
>> traffic, throughput would need to average ca. 0.4 MB/sec. However,
>> median advertised exit bandwidth from Tor Metrics is ca. 1 MB/sec,
>> so it seems unlikely that an exit advertising 0.4 MB/sec would be
>> used very heavily. And so actual usage would be far less than 0.4
>> MB/sec.
> 
>> Conversely, setting RelayBandwidthRate to 3 MB/sec would ultimately
>> lead to heavy use. But with full utilization at 250 GB per day, the
>> relay would hibernate after just four days. There must be some
>> intermediate value that would bring average usage to 0.4 MB/sec.
> 
>> What is the optimal RelayBandwidthRate for a 1000 GB/mo VPS? I'm 
>> guessing that it's about 1 MB/sec.
> 
>>> On 11/23/2014 7:58 PM, Seth wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 22:42:15 -0800, Mirimir
>>>> <mirimir@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> How much throughput do you get with your VPS, 1000 GB/mo or
>>>>> 2000 GB/mo?
>>>
>>>> The 1000 GB/mo applies to whichever value is greater, input or 
>>>> output. So far the Tor node is pushing less than 1.5GB per
>>>> day. Takes a while for traffic to ramp up apparently.
>>>
>>>>> As I read comments in torrc, AccountingMax "applies
>>>>> separately to sent and received bytes, not to their sum", and
>>>>> so "setting '4 GB' may allow up to 8 GB total before
>>>>> hibernating".
>>>
>>>> Yes, others have raised this issue as well and I will look
>>>> into it. _______________________________________________
>>>> tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>>>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>>>
>>>>
> _______________________________________________
>>> tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>>>
>> _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing
>> list tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays