Hi, > On 12 Aug 2019, at 10:46, Christopher Sheats <yawnbox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The second issue we have with running a secondary IP per Tor process is system load. Having more IPs opens more sockets, and we are already putting a lot of load on these multi-core servers. In the next few months, we want to add support for the Rust ed25519-dalek library in Tor. (It's currently our best candidate for useful but optional Rust code.) Having faster crypto should reduce the need for more tor instances. > ... > > IPv4 dependency is a real burden. We would like to see Tor Project help Tor network operators more directly, both financially and securing IPv4 scopes for nonprofit organizations to take ownership of. The latter is needed until we can stop using IPv4 completely and operate only with IPv6. In general, The Tor Project Inc. tries to avoid operating Tor network infrastructure. So IPv4 netblock allocations are a good task for individual volunteers, and Torservers and similar organisations. > It is discouraging to see so many small and large network operators not using IPv6. Why is this such a problem? Tor relays don't automatically detect IPv6 addresses, and they don't test the reachability of IPv6 ORPorts. We are working on a grant application to add this support in Tor. (It's more complex than it seems, because we need to split the reachability checks per-ORPort, and add IPv6 extend support to Tor relays.) > Tor Project, please increase your #IPv6 awareness/outreach similar to how ARIN and the other RIRs try very hard to do. I'll add an awareness objective to our grant application. T
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays