Re: IPv6 Exit [was: Status of Tor proposals ...]

[Marcus Wolschon <Marcus@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

coderman schrieb:
| On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 9:36 PM, Nick Mathewson <nickm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
|> ...
|>    117  IPv6 exits
|>
|>         This is a good start but could use some revision.  See earlier
|>         thread.  I want to merge in IPv6 support in 0.2.1.x, including
|>         support for both entries and exits, so a revision of this
|>         proposal is important.  Marking as NEEDS-REVISION.
|
|
| i'm probably just overlooking an obvious discussion, but i don't see a
| thread related to IPv6 entry support and/or the previous thread
| referenced here.
|
| does the "entry" support imply full IPv6 support?  (or is "entry"
| simply the requisite client support for utilizing IPv6 exit
| capability?)

Hello Nick,

I sent in a patch to allow TOR to (also)locally bind on an IPv6-address
and to allow hidden services to be on IPv6-addreses. It also made all
the internal data-structures IPv6-aware. The missing piece was
to have exit-nodes connect to IPv6-non-TOR-sites and IPv6 for
server-server communication because I did not want to chance any of
the protocoll to support advertising that you have an IPv6-address
that others can connect to or that you have an IPv6-exit-policy.

Marcus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFH/aQpf1hPnk3Z0cQRAh75AJ9cBl7IOei8Limd0w6sjYI6n7iP9QCfcELh
4taT+xV1Z7GruJZR0ISfxQo=
=mNH9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----