Re: Asynchronous bandwidth limiting

[Scott Bennett <bennett@xxxxxxxxxx>]

     On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:58:49 -0700 John Brooks <special@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
top-posted:
>First off, thanks for running a node - the network always needs more
>bandwidth.
>
>As far as i'm aware, it isn't possible to specify incoming and outgoing
>limits separately, and if it were, the outgoing would always be higher. For
>the most part, relayed traffic is pretty close to 1:1; for everything that
>comes in, there is equal data going out (to the next node in the chain, the
>source, or the destination). The one major exception to this is the
>directory; requests for the directory are very small, but the results can be
>pretty large - but, that just means more outgoing than incoming. There is no
>benefit to having more incoming bandwidth than you do outgoing bandwidth.
>You can always disable the directory (DirPort 0) if you want to avoid that
>little bit of outgoing traffic, but usually it isn't too significant.

     I disagree.  Now that my relay has been up for well over a month this
time, pf reports that the RDR rule for the DirPort has handled bytes totalling
nearly 16% of the number of bytes handled by the RDR rule for the ORPort.
I've usually seen it higher than that, typically around 25%.


                                  Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**********************************************************************
* Internet:       bennett at cs.niu.edu                              *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
* "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good  *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army."                                               *
*    -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790         *
**********************************************************************