Re: StrictNodes or StrictExitNodes?

[Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 05:52:36PM +0000, Anon Mus wrote:
> Matthew wrote:
>> I think I am correct to say that StrictExitNodes has been negated in  
>> favour of StrictNodes.
>>
>> However, when I use StrictExitNodes 1 I have no problems.
>>
>> When I use StrictNodes 1 and have viable ExitNodes then Vidalia gives  
>> the error: "Vidalia detected that the Tor software exited 
>> unexpectedly."
>>
>> I am using 0.2.1.26 on Ubuntu 10.04.

When Vidalia tells you Tor exited, you should go to Vidalia's message
window and learn what Tor said as it exited. In this case I'd guess
it's because Tor 0.2.1.26 does not know the 'StrictNodes' config option.
It was introduced in Tor 0.2.2.7-alpha.

> This is interesting. I tried it.. and both seem to work for me on my  
> 0.2.2.10-alpha on win2k.
>
> But.. when I tried - WarnUnsafeSocks 0
>
> I get..
>
> Nov 25 17:50:03.015 [Warning] Failed to parse/validate config: Unknown  
> option 'WarnUnsafeSocks'.  Failing.
> Nov 25 17:50:03.015 [Error] Reading config failed--see warnings above.
>
> Tor then bombs out..

WarnUnsafeSocks was introduced in Tor 0.2.2.14-alpha.

--Roger

***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk    in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/