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

Re: Proposal 105 (handshake revision) needs more thought

Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 07:11:53PM -0400, Watson Ladd wrote:
>>> http://tor.eff.org/svn/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/105-handshake-revision.txt
>> 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?
> What the heck is a "low-latency protocol"?
One that requires fewer round trips by shrinking handshake sizes to the
point where they can be combined.
> Also, notice that this is the TLS handshake we're talking about here.
> Not the circuit handshake.
Ok, that makes sense now
> --Roger

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature