|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
|
|
|
+Author: Geoff Goodell
|
|
|
+Title: Allow controller to manage circuit extensions
|
|
|
+Date: 12 March 2006
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+History:
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ This was once bug 268. Moving it into the proposal system for posterity.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Test:
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Tor controllers should have a means of learning more about circuits built
|
|
|
+through Tor routers. Specifically, if a Tor controller is connected to a Tor
|
|
|
+router, it should be able to subscribe to a new class of events, perhaps
|
|
|
+"onion" or "router" events. A Tor router SHOULD then ensure that the
|
|
|
+controller is informed:
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+(a) (NEW) when it receives a connection from some other location, in which
|
|
|
+case it SHOULD indicate (1) a unique identifier for the circuit, and (2) a
|
|
|
+ServerID in the event of an OR connection from another Tor router, and
|
|
|
+Hostname otherwise.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+(b) (REQUEST) when it receives a request to extend an existing circuit to a
|
|
|
+successive Tor router, in which case it SHOULD provide (1) the unique
|
|
|
+identifier for the circuit, (2) a Hostname (or, if possible, ServerID) of the
|
|
|
+previous Tor router in the circuit, and (3) a ServerID for the requested
|
|
|
+successive Tor router in the circuit;
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+(c) (EXTEND) Tor will attempt to extend the circuit to some other router, in
|
|
|
+which case it SHOULD provide the same fields as provided for REQUEST.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+(d) (SUCCEEDED) The circuit has been successfully extended to some ther
|
|
|
+router, in which case it SHOULD provide the same fields as provided for
|
|
|
+REQUEST.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+We also need a new configuration option analogous to _leavestreamsunattached,
|
|
|
+specifying whether the controller is to manage circuit extensions or not.
|
|
|
+Perhaps we can call it "_leavecircuitsunextended". When set to 0, Tor
|
|
|
+manages everything as usual. When set to 1, a circuit received by the Tor
|
|
|
+router cannot transition from "REQUEST" to "EXTEND" state without being
|
|
|
+directed by a new controller command. The controller command probably does
|
|
|
+not need any arguments, since circuits are extended per client source
|
|
|
+routing, and all that the controller does is accept or reject the extension.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+This feature can be used as a basis for enforcing routing policy.
|
Nick Mathewson