[tor] Expanding our capacity in Quadranet

mark burdett mfburdett at gmail.com
Fri Mar 3 22:58:05 UTC 2017


expanding sounds great!  Seems like the expansion could be great time for
some publicity to let folks know about the project and encourage more
donations.  A "news release"? at least a tweet :)

If possible, expanding in more data centers to further decentralize the Tor
network would be nice :)

--mark B.

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 1:24 PM, John Menerick <omgponies3145 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Sounds good to me.
>
>
> John Menerick
> https://securesql.info
>
> On Mar 3, 2017 3:53 PM, "Patrick O'Doherty" <p at trickod.com> wrote:
>
>> We've reached out to Quadranet about the possibility of adding 3 more
>> servers, which would effectively bring Noisetor's exit capacity to
>> 2Gbps+ (given that our current single host is pushing 500+Mbps).
>>
>> This bump would up our spend to $3,148/month ($787/month x 4) which
>> should be sustainable for a while given our cash reserves. I'm working
>> with Andy to get our accounting back into shape such that we can keep
>> better tabs on our incoming donations.
>>
>> Currently I believe our monthly donations are in the region of
>> $600-700/month. I'll get better figures on this in the coming days.
>>
>> Given that our accounting is not yet fully up to scratch I propose that
>> we do the following in order:
>>
>> a) immediately double our capacity in Quadranet
>> b) rebab our accounting + get an accurate current account status
>> c) plan for a fundraising campaign to raise further recurring donations
>> d) bump our capacity again on the back of the new recurring donations +
>> our cash reserves.
>>
>> thoughts?
>>
>> p
>>
>>
>> Steve Phillips:
>> >>
>> >> I asked some tor folks further after the meeting if Noisetor adding
>> more
>> >> capacity in our current DC would be valuable; they confirmed that it
>> >> would be very much so.
>> >> ...
>> >> I plan on getting better estimates of our current cash on hand but I
>> >> believe it's closer to, or over $10k.
>> >> ...
>> >> I think that if we were to bring up a new Exit or Bridge we'd also
>> have a
>> >> strong story to use to raise further recurring donations and awareness
>> >
>> > ...
>> >
>> > Would love to hear further input given the financial implications of
>> >
>> > making this decision however.
>> >
>> >
>> > All that sounds awesome Patrick; thanks for your work on this.  Who do
>> > you need to talk to before moving forward on deploying the NoiseTor
>> funds
>> > to spin up another exit node or a bridge?
>> >
>> > If it'd be useful, I'd like to help with this; the world needs moar Tor
>> > :-).  And
>> > I'd like to leverage everyone's Tor expertise to put together a "best
>> > practices"
>> > guide to try to remove some of the uncertainty re: *exactly* what steps
>> to
>> > go
>> > through to run a node very safely and effectiveley, especially legal
>> > ambiguity
>> > around running an exit node.
>> >
>> > --Steve
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > tor mailing list
>> > tor at lists.noisebridge.net
>> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/tor
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tor mailing list
>> tor at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/tor
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> tor mailing list
> tor at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/tor
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/tor/attachments/20170303/d22f3d27/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the tor mailing list