tor bandwith ratio

[gabrix]

Fabian Keil wrote:
> gabrix <gabrix at gabrix.ath.cx> wrote:
>
>   
>> I'm sorry if recently my tor node argo666tor wasn't always up ... but 
>> i'm sort of experimenting how much bandwith i have to allocate to the 
>> tor network.My will is to give as much band as possible without slowing 
>> down my connection.I'm trying with this 4 rules:
>>     
>>> AccountingStart day 12:00
>>> AccountingMax 600MB
>>> #BandwidthRate 100 KB    
>>> #BandwidthBurst 200 KB
>>>       
>> But i seriously don't know witch one is best considering i have a TIM 
>> adsl flat!
>>     
>
> Maybe using queues for prioritising empty ACKs would already
> be good enough: http://www.benzedrine.cx/ackpri.html
>
> It's PF and ALTQ specific, but the same can be done with other
> packet filters.
>
> Additionally you could give all Tor traffic a lower priority,
> I think it would be a better solution than to set a hard bandwidth
> limit in Tor, which most of the time would limit your server more
> than necessary.
>
> Fabian
>   

I have this in my iptables script:
> # TOR
> iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9090 -j MARK 
> --set-mark 2
> iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9090 -j RETURN
> iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9091 -j MARK 
> --set-mark 2
> iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 9091 -j RETURN
as 2 tor has a high priority,now is on 5 .
An another question is :if  i announce port 110  and redirect traffic to 
9090 which port shall i consider as priority in the above iptables  ?

Silly question isn't ?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/attachments/20061013/21ea3674/attachment.htm>