Re: concerning tor bug report #1026

[Sebastian Hahn <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Scott,

On Jul 7, 2009, at 8:24 AM, Scott Bennett wrote:
>     I submitted tor bug report #1026 via Jon <scream@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> >,
> who volunteered to post it to bugs.torproject.org for me because  
> that web
> site refuses to log me in.  (Should I write up a bug report on that,  
> too?)
> The report has since accumulated two comments, one on Saturday by  
> Karsten
> Loesing and one on Monday by Roger Dingledine.  I address their  
> comments
> here because I am unable to do so on the web site.

I assume by Karsten you mean Sebastian :-)

>     Karsten and Roger, there seems to be some confusion over the way  
> the
> bug report is listed in its indexed information.  I do not know why  
> it is
> listed as a tor client bug when it clearly should be listed as a tor
> relay (a.k.a. "server") bug (likewise for #996).  I cannot account  
> either
> for the severity and priority rankings for either #1026 or #996.  The
> version in the title of #1026 (0.2.1.15-rc) is the correct version for
> which the symptoms are being reported, not 0.2.0.35 as shown in the
> indexed information as the "Reported Version".

Yes, the bug was reported using different settings than what you have  
reported, however, I was fully aware that this is a relay bug and that  
the version is 0.2.1.15-rc.

>     I would like to reiterate that the bug is not a bug in the  
> authority
> functions of tor, but rather a bug in the relay descriptor-updating
> functions of tor.  Nothing but the date+timestamp was changed in the  
> new
> descriptor update sent to the authorities, but it was sent much  
> earlier
> than the normal time for the ~18-hourly update, so the relay *SHOULD  
> NOT*
> have sent the update in the first place.  That is the whole point.

This is more curious, and explains how I misread the first version of  
the bugreport. I see the problem now, see explanation in the bugreport  
once I get around to updating it.

>     Please feel free to copy the above information into the comments  
> area
> for bug report #1026.
>     Thank you.
>
>
>                                  Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG

Thanks for reporting,

Sebastian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEARECAAYFAkpTNtoACgkQCADWu989zuYf1wCePDuA2Yca6NxrQ1NZi5wKRiHj
H/cAn0V9jT/GDVCvMITeuqO83wPTsAKz
=NwMV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----