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

Re: exitpolicy question

To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: exitpolicy question
From: <carmee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:43:50 +0200
Delivered-to: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@seul.org
Delivered-to: or-talk@seul.org
Delivery-date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:44:38 -0400
In-reply-to: <20050828162734.GA20015@space.xs4all.nl>
Mail-to: carmee@space.xs4all.nl
References: <20050828102047.GA16056@space.xs4all.nl> <20050828122227.GA10005@opium.palfrader.org> <20050828162734.GA20015@space.xs4all.nl>
Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

> Aug  6 DST=213.92.8.4
> Aug 16 DST=82.126.208.33
> Aug 17 DST=84.81.231.189
> Aug 18 DST=84.81.231.189
> Aug 22 DST=81.208.84.20

ahum: 84.81.231.189 was me testing my iptables, so
forget about that. 82.126.208.33 and 81.208.84.20
can be non-tor packets (different behaviour, no related
process logged on those days).

So only 213.92.8.4 (calvino.freenode.net) seems to be
real tor traffic.

References:
- exitpolicy question
  - From: carmee
- Re: exitpolicy question
  - From: Peter Palfrader
- Re: exitpolicy question
  - From: carmee

Prev by Author: Re: exitpolicy question
Next by Author: Re: exitpolicy question
Previous by thread: Re: exitpolicy question
Next by thread: Re: exitpolicy question
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread