Thanks to all for the feedback.
That Torflow works from links slower than those of the fastest relays seems to
indicate it's measuring relative path resistance as much or more than absolute
bandwidth. I often see it produce sensible results and hope that some tuning
and fixing might produce be
On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 09:32:26PM -0800, Jesse V wrote:
> Yep, I've run Mike Perry's code before. It's all in torflow. I was also on a
> 1 gbits link, but as I recall it wasn't that saturated so you might be able
> to get away with a 500 mbits.
I've been running it on a 100mbit link, and it see
Yep, I've run Mike Perry's code before. It's all in torflow. I was also on a 1
gbits link, but as I recall it wasn't that saturated so you might be able to
get away with a 500 mbits.
I last ran his scripts back in July, and the logs and other saved data consumed
all remaining disk space. I don'
A 10GB network connection is not a requirement, 1GB would be fine,
500MB would also be fine. Mine is 4 core, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5606
@ 2.13GHz w/ 8GB of RAM.
Everything is in torflow, I'm not aware of any other code.
-tom
On 2 November 2015 at 17:26, wrote:
> I am considering starting up a
I am considering starting up a passive
BWauth in order to understand how they
work and fix bugs.
What is the minimum and ideal hardware
configuration for a BWauth?
Have my eye on an OVH config with
unmetered 1G, a fuzzy promise
of 500mbps minimum bandwidth and
a 3.4GHz 4core/8thread AES-NI CPU:
