[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: SOCKS4/5 support for OR and direcotry connections
- To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: SOCKS4/5 support for OR and direcotry connections
- From: Christopher Davis <loafier@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:33:07 -0800
- Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:33:16 -0500
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=1lAPdA3Xyj8CSfrkSaEOUBp6nsTwCgWjAMRseixTJIQ=; b=dGsdhu8EDt3kskzA1VAhCrspClu6FdPHyUDHy8yzLoC6cPReEZD5VraGx329knvrJg 7wYXrSzGhipSaK84HzDk0zLoNSGi5wCJ2JcYT/XskB5vCV1Gza+l+nJFENCHx/GNb8BO Hc5sogvGcZ4JFMLbvcnPw/ohl4obZraIbYi9M=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=ShJzD7VVCMFy3Jeq6lBEy+Gvprd2+eg10qaN8aFwCSpoiwKF7XyRfjOftS13LHNInm 1E+TH1jUObSSwlEBy9stjQTyHVT8f+WC39yeDXA0CxV/sr0PkM5hBx2oZqpPOeP8kboB btc7L1paYjy/guZaJXRqyAl7XPoI5pnlKJAYQ=
- In-reply-to: <20090113221606.GG19155@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <20090113202615.GA49549@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20090113221606.GG19155@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 05:16:06PM -0500, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:26:15PM -0800, Christopher Davis wrote:
> > I'm working on a patch to enable SOCKS 4 and 5 support for
> > Tor's OR and directory connections. I got SOCKS working for OR
> > connections already, but the directory behavior is a bit more
> > challenging to SOCKSify, because it queues the request immediately
> > on the connection's outbuf with the directory_send_command() call
> > right after connecting in directory_initiate_command_rend(). To
> > get SOCKS to work, the parameters (resource, payload, etc) would
> > need to be saved to the connection structure so
> > directory_send_command() can be called after the proxy handshake
> > finishes. Would that be acceptable?
>
> Since Tor has moved towards doing the directory fetches over an OR
> connection (it even does it by default in Tor 0.2.0.x and later),
> I would suggest that you don't actually need to support socks proxies
> for directory fetches.
>
> --Roger
I'll leave directory.c alone, then.
Is there any reason why Tor needs to support direct directory
fetches at this point? Perhaps the code could be simplified a bit.
--
Christopher Davis