[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: (FWD) Tor, Socks bind, and BitTorrent
- To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: (FWD) Tor, Socks bind, and BitTorrent
- From: "Paul Gardner" <email@example.com>
- Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 20:39:18 +0100
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivery-date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 15:39:58 -0400
- References: <20040929162640.T10467@moria.mit.edu> <BCE4C197-129E-11D9-8284-000393A581BE@felter.org> <0e6301c4a6b8$ee228710$0200a8c0@Rhiannon>
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
Hmm, I've set up a hidden service for the tracker and I'm getting core-dumps
with 0.0.8 when I run. I'm on Windows XP. Anything I can do to help diagnose
the problem? It dumps immediately if the service dir exists. It dumps after
a while if I delete the dir and run.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Gardner" <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: (FWD) Tor, Socks bind, and BitTorrent
> I have it working at the moment by proxying the tracker traffic (currently
> defaulting to SOCKS V5 due to Java doing the proxying for us) and outbound
> peer-to-peer traffic (via SOCKS 4a lashed up by myself). Of course, if
> eveyone relies on outbound only then things don't work, so this approach
> will only help if a small percentage of peers are taking it.
> The idea of a hidden tracker sounds interesting, I'll investigate further.
> Are there plans for a Java version of your software? SSL is "built in", as
> are a lot of other security functions, so it may be fairly straight
> to implement.
> Do you think you could ever scale to carry BT traffic?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wes Felter" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: <email@example.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 6:08 AM
> Subject: Re: (FWD) Tor, Socks bind, and BitTorrent
> > On Sep 29, 2004, at 3:26 PM, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> > >
> > > How do clients interact with the Tracker in BT -- do they connect once
> > > and keep talking periodically, or do they connect every so often, talk
> > > a bit, and disconnect?
> > Since the tracker protocol is just HTTP, it's the latter.
> > > b) Each user runs behind a hidden service.
> > This isn't strictly necessary, since BT peers don't *have* to accept
> > incoming connections at all. A peer that only makes outgoing
> > connections can still participate in the BT swarm, and that model
> > should work with Tor easily.
> > This leaves the problem that the peers who *do* listen for connections
> > are exposed.
> > Wes Felter - firstname.lastname@example.org - http://felter.org/wesley/