Hi,
I added a few new DNS related fields for exit relays to the ContactInfo sharing specification if you want to contribute towards a more complete picture on how exit relays configure DNS.
https://github.com/nusenu/ContactInfo-Information-Sharing-Specification#dnsl...
regards, nusenu
https://github.com/nusenu/ContactInfo-Information-Sharing-Specification
Is there an assumption that a 100% of the system is dedicated to Tor or will there be a key available to specify? I.e. 25%BW and/or 50%CPU.
I'm just saying as I have three bare metal systems two that have 1gbit Ethernet no data cap but they only use 15%...
Paul
Paul Templeton:
https://github.com/nusenu/ContactInfo-Information-Sharing-Specification
Is there an assumption that a 100% of the system is dedicated to Tor
actually there is, you are right.
I should open an issue for it.
or will there be a key available to specify? I.e. 25%BW and/or 50%CPU.
I'm just saying as I have three bare metal systems two that have 1gbit Ethernet no data cap but they only use 15%...
Due to this last sentence I'm not sure if you want to convey availability (only xx% of resources are available to tor) or usage (tor uses only xx% of the resources it has available)?
https://github.com/nusenu/ContactInfo-Information-Sharing-Specification
paul:
or will there be a key available to specify? I.e. 25%BW and/or 50%CPU. I'm just saying as I have three bare metal systems two that have 1gbit Ethernet no data cap but they only use 15%...
nusenu:
Due to this last sentence I'm not sure if you want to convey availability (only xx% of resources are available to tor) or usage (tor uses only xx% of the resources it has available)?
The latter - Tor uses only xx% of the resources it has available. It might help by knowing where capacity is available for extra services if and when required by the Tor Project. Just Saying.
Paul
609662E824251C283164243846C035C803940378
nusenu:
Due to this last sentence I'm not sure if you want to convey availability (only xx% of resources are available to tor) or usage (tor uses only xx% of the resources it has available)?
The latter - Tor uses only xx% of the resources it has available. It might help by knowing where capacity is available for extra services if and when required by the Tor Project. Just Saying.
since contactInfo is rather static/long term and the used resources can change very quickly I don't think it is a good fit to put into the ContactInfo
but I added the RelayBandwidthRate setting consideration to the uplinkbw field.
On 31 May 2018, at 04:29, nusenu nusenu-lists@riseup.net wrote:
nusenu:
Due to this last sentence I'm not sure if you want to convey availability (only xx% of resources are available to tor) or usage (tor uses only xx% of the resources it has available)?
The latter - Tor uses only xx% of the resources it has available. It might help by knowing where capacity is available for extra services if and when required by the Tor Project. Just Saying.
since contactInfo is rather static/long term and the used resources can change very quickly I don't think it is a good fit to put into the ContactInfo
but I added the RelayBandwidthRate setting consideration to the uplinkbw field.
RelayBandwidthRate is already included in relay descriptors as bandwidth-avg: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt#n424
Although strictly that field is:
bandwidth-avg = min(BandwidthRate, RelayBandwidthRate, MaxAdvertisedBandwidth)
T
but I added the RelayBandwidthRate setting consideration to the uplinkbw field.
RelayBandwidthRate is already included in relay descriptors as bandwidth-avg: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt#n424
Although strictly that field is:
bandwidth-avg = min(BandwidthRate, RelayBandwidthRate, MaxAdvertisedBandwidth)
good point, so I can automatically check if bw-avg is lower than the given value in the field when parsing the data
Hi,
On 31/05/18 18:26, nusenu wrote:
RelayBandwidthRate is already included in relay descriptors as bandwidth-avg: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt#n424
Although strictly that field is:
bandwidth-avg = min(BandwidthRate, RelayBandwidthRate, MaxAdvertisedBandwidth)
good point, so I can automatically check if bw-avg is lower than the given value in the field when parsing the data
When we present bandwidth-avg in relay search, we actually call it "bandwidth rate". Maybe we shouldn't.
Thanks, Iain.
On 1 Jun 2018, at 05:48, Iain Learmonth irl@torproject.org wrote:
On 31/05/18 18:26, nusenu wrote:
RelayBandwidthRate is already included in relay descriptors as bandwidth-avg: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt#n424
Although strictly that field is:
bandwidth-avg = min(BandwidthRate, RelayBandwidthRate, MaxAdvertisedBandwidth)
good point, so I can automatically check if bw-avg is lower than the given value in the field when parsing the data
When we present bandwidth-avg in relay search, we actually call it "bandwidth rate". Maybe we shouldn't.
Seems fine to me. It is the bandwidth rate.
T
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
-
Iain Learmonth -
nusenu -
Paul Templeton -
teor