[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #6257 [Stem]: Bump to @type bridge-extra-info 1.1
#6257: Bump to @type bridge-extra-info 1.1
---------------------+------------------------------------------------------
Reporter: karsten | Owner: atagar
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: normal | Milestone:
Component: Stem | Version:
Keywords: | Parent:
Points: | Actualpoints:
---------------------+------------------------------------------------------
Changes (by asn):
* status: needs_information => new
Comment:
Replying to [comment:6 atagar]:
> > Shouldn't stem also accept versions 1.2 and higher? It won't
necessarily understand the new keywords, but it should parse all the parts
that it understands.
>
> Fixed...
>
https://gitweb.torproject.org/stem.git/commitdiff/d52e934c24c9d327e277eb60bfee060697cb43ec
>
> > See the new transport keyword in dir-spec.txt...
>
> Hmm, this is kinda a weird field then that the spec says...
> "transport" transportname address:port [arglist]
>
> but will only appear in practice as...
> "transport" transportname
>
> Is there any reason that stem should have the ability to parse the
former? If so, then can I rely on transportname being unique so I can make
this a {transportname => address:port [arglist]} dictionary?
>
Yes, at the moment, `transportname` is supposed to be the unique
identifier of a pluggable transport used by a bridge.
That is, if a bridge publishes more than one `transport` lines with the
same `transportname`, it is either evil or a future version of tor where
we have decided that this should be allowed (I don't see this happening
atm).
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/6257#comment:7>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs