Re: [tor-dev] (revised) Proposal 180: Pluggable Transports for Circumvention

[Ian Goldberg <iang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I just took a very quick look.  Generally, I like it.  ;-)

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 05:17:23PM -0400, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>   To configure one of these programs, it should be sufficient simply to
>   list it in your torrc.  The program tells Tor which transports it
>   provides.  The Tor consensus should carry a new approved version number that
>   is specific for pluggable transport; this will allow Tor to know when a
>   particular transport is known to be unsafe safe or non-functional.

I'm not sure I understand the above.

>       "MANAGED_TRANSPORT_VER=1" -- To tell the proxy which versions
>        of this configuration protocol Tor supports.  Future versions
>        will give a comma-separated list.  Clients MUST accept
>        comma-separated lists containing any version that they
>        recognize, and MUST work correctly even if some of the
>        versions they don't recognize are non-numeric.

Then you need to say what the valid characters in any future version
numbers can be.

> Bridge authority behavior
> 
>   We need to specify a way to test different transport methods that
>   bridges claim to support.  We should test as many as possible.  We
>   should NOT require that we have a way to tra

This paragraph is truncated.

   - Ian
_______________________________________________
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev