[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: The Case for Banning Reduced Hop Count Implementations
- To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: The Case for Banning Reduced Hop Count Implementations
- From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:43:47 -0500
- Delivered-to: archiver@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@xxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:43:51 -0500
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=obpsnWYZgl2VZQDxHvWwqtv4Io0t4QqZZNIUvw7OCS0=; b=hIqTX8zLc8eNPT43Qo0AEhjRiJn5P/bxK6m65evZF+2pbaWG85pWMtU8PXIw4ZvaES CW3LppXKDSEGuIwYIR7nJaR6f7jU+9hagcgvYvi/UpgyMOKO61brnKyclYvO2L3VnPN1 jmBfhmdNoW4LOHEU7t65AcNJ9Q+Za9De8lros=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=rxi2+W3sM7WfPt9ITr/E5JKwsa+USRAvtn1FpycMtcIT6/4FAI0Of0nRabQK8WV1G+ Npoq+uJBJnsML5gYfRd25+GeQqLODrTfhx9/Tf+xDCDTHWdVYZ98BwKMuFx897uFtaze 2B4b8iSLKHCf1anoC9hedJ0giGUP7KfCW+E38=
- In-reply-to: <4B0A1DD6.6080303@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <4B0A1DD6.6080303@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Lucky Green <shamrock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]
> seeking higher anonymity. The end state, if lower than three hop
> implementations are permitted to use the Tor network, is that Tor's
> network performance will acceptable only to users of lower hop clients.
I presume you can back this assertion up with simulation results, at a minimum?
I look forward to reading your paper.
[snip]
> origin. The protocols commonly used for such downloads can accept higher
> latency than the interactive protocols needed by the part of the user
Which is why twiddling the hop count isn't attractive for them.
It is attractive for IRC, for example, because with the current hop counts
it can be difficult to keep a TCP connection up for long. Long lived
connections don't benefit much from the longer paths in any case because the
provide ample opportunity to simply correlate entry and exit traffic and ignore
the interior path.
***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/