[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
RE: AllowedUnverifiedNodes
- To: <or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: AllowedUnverifiedNodes
- From: "Edman, Matt" <Matt_Edman@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 10:46:54 -0500
- Delivered-to: archiver@seul.org
- Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@seul.org
- Delivered-to: or-talk@seul.org
- Delivery-date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 11:47:56 -0400
- Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcWtt3KQXBImQflAQhaHqSs0j/gIlAC5epvA
- Thread-topic: AllowedUnverifiedNodes
> I submitted a bug to the torcp bugtracker about the
AllowUnverifiedNodes setting, but wasn't sure what the correct
> syntax would be for allowing no unverified nodes.
>
> Is it just "AllowUnverifiedNodes "on a line by itself for none? I
tried "AllowUnverifiedNodes None" and
> "AllowUnverifiedNodes Null", but tor doesn't like any of those lines.
It accepts "AllowUnverifiedNodes ", but I
> don't know if that just reverts to the default of "middle, rendezvous"
or does it actually mean none.
This turned out to be a "quirk" in Tor where it didn't really provide a
way to say "none." Roger also noticed that LongLivedPorts has this
problem as well and they hope to have a fix in place pretty soon.
On a side note, I put up an 0.0.2 of torcp so check it out and keep
reporting any bugs you find to the bugtracker!
http://www.freehaven.net/~edmanm/torcp/download.html
Thanks,
Matt