[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Privoxy usage?

On 8/18/07, Juliusz Chroboczek <Juliusz.Chroboczek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ...
> > with Tor your tcp endpoint is terminating quite close, in this case on
> > the same host stack or one host over.
> That's not TCP over TCP.  That's two TCP connecitons put end to end,
> and that's fine.

indeed.  i need more coffee before getting into technical protocol
discussions. (i was misreading part of this thread...)

> On the other hand, if you run a layer 2 VPN over tor, you get TCP
> within IP within multiple layers of SSL within TCP.  And that's not
> good, either for your performance, or for the network.

right, there can be a hit here.  enough that maybe interest in the UDP
transport proposal could get some attention? :)

however, this is a much bigger hit for lossy links, rather than latent
links.  TCP VPN over WiFi is much more problematic than TCP VPN over
Tor in my experience.  i've also had success tweaking the TCP VPN
layer (disable nagle for example, and i recall someone using cork to
benefit too).

the Tor UDP proposal is here:
http://tor.eff.org/svn/trunk/doc/spec/proposals/100-tor-spec-udp.txt ,
DTLS is more mature now than it was at time of writing, but this still
has unresolved issues.

best regards,