On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 22:19:40 +0000 isis <isis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Personally I think when we deploy the next round of transports > > (meek, and either ScrambleSuit or obfs4) would be the right time to > > revisit this, and I can't think of a good reason to keep obfs2 > > around beyond "there are bridges that only support obfs2" which is > > a fairly terrible reason keep distributing the protocol to new > > users. > > Scramblesuit is "deployed", if you ask me... We've got roughly 2221 > scramblesuit supporting bridges. Kind of. TBB/Orbot and the FirefoxOS code all need to move to 0.2.5.x for those bridges to actually be useful which I belive is Real Soon Now. Just having bridges that only people that build stuff on their own can connect to is a bit silly. > > My other objection to the idea a while back was that Orbot only > > supported obfs2, but that's been fixed for a while now. > > So... I'm going to wait for an update from the Huggable Transport > folks, telling me to phase out obfsXYZ, whenever that happens. Until > then, obfs3 is still the default transport distributed. > > Does this sound okay to everyone? Otherwise you're shoving me back > into the hell where I get yelled at if I don't make a unilateral > decision, and also get yelled at if I do make a decision. It's kind > of annoying to get yelled at all the time. :( That's fine by me. I belive obfs3 should be ok for a while, and there are easier ways to identify bridges via active probing than doing on obfs3 handshake anyway (Fixing such things is also on my TODO list). Regards, -- Yawning Angel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev