Delivery-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 17:48:27 -0500
Return-Path: <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on moria.seul.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Original-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (eugeni.torproject.org [38.229.72.13])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CC211E0BB9
	for <archiver@seul.org>; Fri, 16 Jan 2015 17:48:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74B0532B92;
	Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:48:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C05F32B37
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:48:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at 
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (eugeni.torproject.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id JFgw-3lU7IOh for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:48:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp2.hushmail.com (smtp2.hushmail.com [65.39.178.134])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.hushmail.com", Issuer "Self-signed" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 041B232A56
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:48:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp2.hushmail.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp2.hushmail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B6222A01F0
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:48:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.hushmail.com (w3.hushmail.com [65.39.178.62])
 by smtp2.hushmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:48:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by smtp.hushmail.com (Postfix, from userid 99)
 id 51D6AC0106; Fri, 16 Jan 2015 22:48:14 +0000 (UTC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 17:48:14 -0500
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
From: "l.m" <ter.one.leeboi@hush.com>
In-Reply-To: <54B9774F.7000403@veloc1ty.de>
Message-Id: <20150116224814.51D6AC0106@smtp.hushmail.com>
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] What relay does really help the TOR project?
X-BeenThere: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
List-Id: "all discussion about theory, design,
 and development of Onion Routing" <tor-talk.lists.torproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/>
List-Post: <mailto:tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

"Josef 'veloc1ty' Stautner"  wrote:Long story short: What type of
relay helps the TOR project more?
Exit-Relay or Middle-relay? Is it really the "job" from TOR to provide
an exit to the normal internet resources or should the focus be on
hidden services?
First, thank you for operating a Tor node. Second, I would like to
suggest a simple solution to your question. Tor is already designed to
make the best use out of any node. The most important thing is to make
your node the most useful you can manage. Try to keep it stable and
running. If your service provider allows you to operate an exit make
your exit policy reflects this. I'm not trying to question your stance
on allowing porn. What I think is important is that some random user
of Tor may have stumbled onto your exit and, noticing it's usefulness,
may have targeted your node using dotexit notation. I'm sure lots of
users single out good exits in this opportunistic manner and for many
reasons.

That aside, if you make your node as stable and useful as you can then
the algorithms take over. Your node will be used in the best way
possible by default. See the dir-spec and path-spec [1] for more
details. The benefit of this approach is that if network conditions
change your node may change it's primary role on an hourly basis.

-- leeroy

[1] https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree

-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

