Re: [tor-relays] Relays vulnerable to OpenSSL bug: Please upgrade

[grarpamp <grarpamp@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Actually, I'd like us to take this opportunity to throw out the Named
> and Unnamed flags entirely.

> I think we've done pretty well at teaching
> users to use $fingerprints rather than nicknames in the few cases where
> they actually want to specify a particular relay.

> And only two-ish directory authorities still track and vote about Named

Second the idea of completely tossing names internally in favor of fingerprints.

> It would be great to have somebody think through the implications of
> what exactly we'll lose by dropping them, so we can make a more informed
> decision. Maybe that could be one of you? :)

I've felt the real benefit of nicknames has always and only been
in operator participation (woot, other than dns and http on my OR IP,
I can feel good by having this short name string), and moniker recognition
(hey, look at this metrics widget, I can search/spot all kinds of human
readable cool nodes... maybe I'll run one or keep running mine, etc).

Nicknames, 'contact' and the like could be merged into new a formally structured
user metadata descriptor field. Some fields of which might be used by
applications
such as onionoo to populate other empty fields. ie:
'udata nickname[16char]: email[32char]: uri[32char]: blurb[up to
remaining n char limit]'
_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays