[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #11211 [Core Tor/Tor]: Multiple ServerTransportListenAddr entries should be allowed per transport.
#11211: Multiple ServerTransportListenAddr entries should be allowed per transport.
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: yawning | Owner: kaie
Type: enhancement | Status:
| needs_revision
Priority: Medium | Milestone: Tor:
| 0.3.0.x-final
Component: Core Tor/Tor | Version: Tor:
| unspecified
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: tor-bridge, pt, needs-proposal, | Actual Points:
tor-pt, bridgedb-parsers, 028-triage, ipv6, |
tor-03-unspecified-201612 |
Parent ID: #10629 | Points:
Reviewer: | Sponsor: T/U
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by dcf):
Replying to [comment:10 kaie]:
> I'm trying to contribute a fix for this issue.
>
> Would it be acceptable to use a different configuration syntax, that
uses only a single line for each transport type, and allows multiple
address:port combinations to be listed on the line, separated by space, as
in the following example?
>
> ServerTransportListenAddr obfs3 0.0.0.0:443 [::]:443
This is a good idea, but I think it's more complicated than just giving a
list to ServerTransportListenAddr. You would need to also make
ServerTransportOptions be similarly split, which would probably require
new syntax in torrc. It would also require a change to pt-spec, because
there would need to be a rule or something that states which options
pertain to which listening address when there are multiple ones.
I've been frustrated by this in the past, too. For example, in
comment:10:ticket:20348, I wanted to run three obfs4 bridges with slightly
different configuration on the same IP address, and there's just no way to
do it other than to run three instances of tor. It was probably a mistake
for torrc to use the transport name as a key that links
ServerTransportListenAddr and ServerTransportOptions, because that makes a
built-in assumption that there's only one thing identified by that
transport.
Incidentally, it might be the the case that using only the IPv6 syntax
already does what you want. On some systems `[::]` will listen on both
IPv6 and IPv4, so you don't need to separately list 0.0.0.0.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/11211#comment:22>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs