| 
					
				 | 
			
			
				@@ -384,7 +384,16 @@ command_process_destroy_cell(cell_t *cell, or_connection_t *conn) 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				           reason == END_CIRC_REASON_REQUESTED) { 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				         /* XXXX This logic is wrong.  Really, we should report the fact that 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				          * the circuit was closed because of a DESTROY, *and* we should report 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				-         * the reason that we were given. -NM */ 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         * the reason that we were given. -NM 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         *   Hrmm. We could store the fact that we sent a truncate and the 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         * reason for this truncate in circuit_t. If we ever get a destroy 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         * that doesn't match this reason, we could complain loudly -MP 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         *   That won't work for the cases where the destroy is not because of 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         * a truncate, though.  The idea is that if we get a DESTROYED cell 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         * with reason 'CONNECTFAILED' and another DESTROYED cell with reason 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         * 'RESOURCELIMIT', the controller may want to know the reported 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         * reason. -NM 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				+         */ 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				         reason = END_CIRC_REASON_DESTROYED; 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				       } 
			 | 
		
	
		
			
				 | 
				 | 
			
			
				       circuit_mark_for_close(circ, reason); 
			 |