Hi, this is my first post here.
I'm running 3 bridges in brazil (maybe one of them becomes a middle-relay), so I want to know what we need here to have some bridge authority for example here in south america. Is too much different from a normal relay? I've already see the "authorithative flags" for torrc but dont made any changes. I think something more should be done and is not so easy.
Best regards.
torjoy:
Hi, this is my first post here.
I'm running 3 bridges in brazil (maybe one of them becomes a middle-relay), so I want to know what we need here to have some bridge authority for example here in south america. Is too much different from a normal relay? I've already see the "authorithative flags" for torrc but dont made any changes. I think something more should be done and is not so easy.
maybe you want to elaborate on why (motivation) you want to run your own bridge authority instead of using tor's default.
That will help people to give you a meaningful answer.
The making of a bridge authority desire is from the observation that here in South America we haven't any authority and I think this can help tor to improve the network metrics on South America side. Also maybe in another countries too. Of course, all the current authorities are good but maybe we can improve it inserting more bridges online. I'm operating 3 bridges and one middle-relay for now and all have good metrics but the bandwidth measured is lower than i've set, maybe putting some authority here we can improve the metrics of all relays here in South America.
Best regards.
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Em Sexta-feira, Julho 12, 2019 9:57 AM, nusenu nusenu-lists@riseup.net escreveu:
torjoy:
Hi, this is my first post here. I'm running 3 bridges in brazil (maybe one of them becomes a middle-relay), so I want to know what we need here to have some bridge authority for example here in south america. Is too much different from a normal relay? I've already see the "authorithative flags" for torrc but dont made any changes. I think something more should be done and is not so easy.
maybe you want to elaborate on why (motivation) you want to run your own bridge authority instead of using tor's default.
That will help people to give you a meaningful answer.
https://twitter.com/nusenu_ https://mastodon.social/@nusenu
tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
torjoy:
The making of a bridge authority desire is from the observation that here in South America we haven't any authority and I think this can help tor to improve the network metrics on South America side. Also maybe in another countries too. Of course, all the current authorities are good but maybe we can improve it inserting more bridges online. I'm operating 3 bridges and one middle-relay for now and all have good metrics but the bandwidth measured is lower than i've set, maybe putting some authority here we can improve the metrics of all relays here in South America.
I believe there is a misunderstanding about bridge authority, tor directory authorities (for relays) and bandwidth authorities. There is currently only one bridge authority AFAIK and I have doubts that adding one in South America benefits what you are trying to achieve.
If we look at the available bridges over time [1] we can see that the tor network never recovered from the hard and somewhat unplanned switch from the previous bridge authority even though it is more than a year ago.
So yes, I believe it would be beneficial for redundancy reasons to have more than one bridge authority but that is probably a big task.
[1] https://metrics.torproject.org/networksize.html?start=2017-01-27&end=201...
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
-
nusenu -
torjoy