Re: [tor-relays] Draft Fallback Directory List

[teor <teor2345@xxxxxxxxx>]

> On 12 Dec. 2016, at 05:08, Andrew Deason <adeason@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 23:45:42 +1100
> teor <teor2345-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> One or more of your relays have been selected as fallback directory
>> mirrors[0] for the next tor release. Please keep the relay available on
>> the same addresses, ports, and identity key (fingerprint) for the next
>> 2 years.
> 
> Does ipv6 connectivity matter at all for the purposes of being a
> fallback directory mirror? I can see of course it's not required, but
> I'm not sure if an ipv6 address would be used at all (as a directory
> mirror). That is, if I added a v6 addr to a relay in that list, would
> that help anything, or not yet?

It helps clients configured to use dual-stack IPv6:
ClientPreferIPv6ORPort 1

And clients configured to use IPv6 only:
ClientUseIPv4 0
UseMicrodescriptors 0

But as they are manual configs, not many clients use them yet.
We want to make dual-stack easier (even automatic) on clients, but we
need more IPv6 relays to preserve client privacy.

> I assume that adding a v6 address does not violate the "keep the same
> address/port/key for the next 2 years" requirement. Is that correct?

Yes, but you need to keep *both* addresses for 2 years after you add
IPv6. Let me know, and I'll add the IPv6 address to the fallback list.

T

-- 
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org
------------------------------------------------------------------------



_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays