On 15 Dec (03:47:25), teor wrote: > > > On 15 Dec 2017, at 03:29, David Goulet <dgoulet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > The place I'm thinking of is the EXTEND in IPv6 and relay self-testing in > > IPv6. This seems a more critical point to build into the network before we can > > start building HS support on top (single onion is different but will have to > > do with HS code in some ways). > > I'm working on this right now. > It should be ready by mid-January, but it needs a proposal, so maybe it will > end up in 0.3.4 instead. Ok! Can you tell me which ticket is that so I don't start poking at it? I think without a nice layer of link specifier IPv6, we can't move forward on much other things? Let me know how I can be most useful here while you do that. > > I would also like to make it easier to configure IPv6 relays. IPv6 support isn't > as useful as it could be, because only 15% of relays support IPv6. > Address autodetection would go a long way here. Are you suggesting something like "Address auto" or "ORPort auto:<port>" kind of thing that we enable by default for both v4 and v6 and then explicitly set it if you want a specific address? Auto detection of address becomes complicated with interfaces that have multiple IPs... Which one do you choose? But aren't you worried of Tor finding an IPv6 for a relay and starting using it while the operator has no idea that it is happening? Dunno, maybe some relays are bandwidth capped on v4 or/and v6 (would suck but)? Anyway this can be a ticket (if not already done). > > > Then, making sure a client can do IPv6 seems the natural next step. And then > > we finish with HS. > > > > So to summarize (in order of what I think we should do first): > > > > 1. Relay > > 2. Client > > 3. HS/Single Onion > > > > My two cents on this. > > Seems good to me. > I want to try and focus on getting minimum working code. > Then we can add extra features later. Agree++! > > > Also, 033 freeze is arriving rather fast that is in theory mid-january so we > > have to consider the fact that we might not get the whole thing in 033 but we > > can certainly try :). > > We can do parts in 0.3.3 and parts in 0.3.4. Sure thing. Cheers! David > > T -- PQgdff5S0a51LrwYmq/+PRgWSz+jjvkgZTCn3plzEkY=
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev