Re: [tor-dev] The Torouter project - where are we now?

[andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 07:15:17PM +0100, runa.sandvik@xxxxxxxxx wrote 7.4K bytes in 195 lines about:
: My mistake. I thought someone had a bridge running and that the only
: problem was disk space. I'll see if I can set up my router as a bridge
: this weekend and get things working.

I did, on the buffalo.  It worked fine with a 1gb usb drive stuck in the
router.

: Sure, that would work. I believe users will have to re-flash their
: routers to install a new image, though. Or maybe there's a nice way to
: handle upgrades in OpenWrt?

99% of users are not going to reflash their router.  If it isn't a point
and click automatic update, it won't happen.  I hate reflashing openwrt
on the buffalo. 

: > That's similar to what I said on IRC; it seems reasonable to keep the
: > Tor package updated in OpenWRT. We need to decide if we want to build
: > regular packages for installation and also if we want to host them. I
: > think this is mostly an Erinn question - helix?

We can barely keep up with the current build load, nevermind adding new
operating systems.  

Torouter based on openwrt is an experiment.  It seems it's going to cost
us more time, effort, and people than we have to spare.  The entire
torouter, or bridge/relay-by-default in hardware, is an experiment.  

I'd much rather see a debian-based torouter exist.  We can more easily
integrate debian packages of the necessary architecture, likely ARM,
into our build farm than we can an entirely new OS and build
environment. 

The openwrt-based torouter can be a community-run and maintained
project.  I'd rather Tor Project spend its time and effort on making tor
work on debian-compatible low-cost hardware, like a dreamplug or excito,
than trying to force tor into a new OS and platform.

-- 
Andrew
pgp key: 0x74ED336B
_______________________________________________
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev