[tor] Re: Current state of affairs regarding Torservers.net

  • From: tagnaq <tagnaq@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: torservers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 18:17:28 +0100

On 02/12/2011 05:12 PM, Andrew Weightman wrote:
> Again, I agree why not build an array of nodes that can be scaled up or
> down as funds allow.

I disagree, simple because the price per MBit is bad if you buy many 100
MBit nodes compared to one 1GBit node, but Julian Wissmann pointed that
already out.

FDC 1GBit unmetered per MBit price: 0.3$*
Swiftway 100 MBit unmetered price: 1.2$**

*) I acknowledge that this not totally correct because the node won't be
able to actually relay/use 1000MBit/s, but a calculation with a more
realistic value (800MBit) is still much cheaper then 100MBit nodes:
300/800$ = 0.375$ per MBit

**)  89Euro/month / 100MBit = 0.89E => ~1.2$

I agree that 800$/month (Swiftway GBit) is to expensive given the
current financial capacities.

I agree with Julian Wissmann to go for the FDC 1GBit option, because
300$/month seam to be a feasible amount of money to run it long-term and
it is one of the cheapest options available.

the main options probably are
- FDC (CZ) 1GBit unmetered 300$/month
- wait for an answer from 100tb (UK server) at least it seams that
pdqvpn was able to get a server there
- wait for an answer from evoboxes ("dedi - medium" 225GBP/month for
1GBit unmetered "not shared") [225GBP =  ~360$]
- 2host: I didn't find a unmetered option or something like 100TB
traffic on http://2host.com/dedicated.html
- stick with the cheapest 100MBit unmetered option (Swiftway) for the moment

The main question still is: Will FDC accept a Tor Exit-Node?

I guess Moritz is just waiting for an answer from FDC...

Other related posts: