Re: [tor-dev] How do Ed25519 relay IDs look like?

[nusenu <nusenu-lists@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Damian Johnson:
>> Isn't using "fingerprint" not a bit misleading since it is not the output of
>> a hash function but the ed25519 master public key itself?
> 
> Hi nusenu, that's fair. We've begun to conflate a couple concepts here...
> 
> * Relay operators, controllers, DirPorts, etc all require a canonical
> relay identifier. They don't care how it's derived as long as it's
> unique to the relay.
> 
> * Relays publish a public ed25519 key. This is an implementation
> detail that isn't of interest to the above populations.
> 
> I'd advise against attempting to rename "fingerprint". That hasn't
> gone well for hidden services [1]. But with that aside, relay
> identifiers and the representation of ed25519 public keys don't
> necessarily need to be one and the same.

I'll wait until you (Tor developers) decided on the final naming and format
and added a reference 

https://github.com/nusenu/tor-relay-well-known-uri-spec/commit/949980e72132ba20ca9f687ed8d0e8b43a333834

thanks,
nusenu

-- 
https://mastodon.social/@nusenu

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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