[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Proposal 105 (handshake revision) needs more thought

Roger Dingledine wrote:
> Hi folks,
> Proposal 105 looks like a nice start. For those of you who haven't
> already read it, go look at
> http://tor.eff.org/svn/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/105-handshake-revision.txt
> I've got a few questions/comments, based on trying to write the
> "Advertising versions in routerdescs and networkstatuses" section.
Won't the use of a VERSION cell prevent the use of a low-latency
protocol since we will be waiting for the VERSION cell before going
forwards with the handshake?
Watson Ladd

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature