|
@@ -0,0 +1,340 @@
|
|
|
|
+Proposal : IPv6 exit
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+Overview
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ Extend Tor for TCP exit via IPv6 transport and DNS resolution of IPv6
|
|
|
|
+ addresses. This proposal does not imply any IPv6 support for OR traffic,
|
|
|
|
+ only exit and name resolution.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+Contents
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+0. Motivation
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ As the IPv4 address space becomes more scarce there is increasing effort to
|
|
|
|
+ provide Internet services via the IPv6 protocol. Many hosts are available
|
|
|
|
+ at IPv6 endpoints which are currently inaccessible for Tor users.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ Extending Tor to support IPv6 exit streams and IPv6 DNS name resolution will
|
|
|
|
+ allow users of the Tor network to access these hosts. This capability would
|
|
|
|
+ be present for those who do not currently have IPv6 access, thus increasing
|
|
|
|
+ the utility of Tor and furthering adoption of IPv6.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1. Design
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.1. General design overview
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ There are three main components to this proposal. The first is a method for
|
|
|
|
+ routers to advertise their ability to exit IPv6 traffic. The second is the
|
|
|
|
+ manner in which routers resolve names to IPv6 addresses. Last but not least
|
|
|
|
+ is the method in which clients communicate with Tor to resolve and connect
|
|
|
|
+ to IPv6 endpoints anonymously.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.2. Router IPv6 exit support
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In order to specify exit policies and IPv6 capability new directives in the
|
|
|
|
+ Tor configuration will be needed. If a router advertises IPv6 exit policies
|
|
|
|
+ in its descriptor this will signal the ability to provide IPv6 exit. There
|
|
|
|
+ are a number of additional default deny rules associated with this new
|
|
|
|
+ address space which are detailed in the addendum.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ When Tor is started on a host it should check for the presence of a global
|
|
|
|
+ unicast address, [2000::]/3, and if present include the default IPv6 exit
|
|
|
|
+ policies and any user specified IPv6 exit policies.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ If a user provides IPv6 exit policies but no global unicast address is
|
|
|
|
+ available Tor should generate a warning and not publish the IPv6 policy in
|
|
|
|
+ the router descriptor.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ It should be noted that IPv4 mapped IPv6 addresses are not valid exit
|
|
|
|
+ destinations. This mechanism is mainly used to interoperate with both IPv4
|
|
|
|
+ and IPv6 clients on the same socket. Any attempts to use an IPv4 mapped
|
|
|
|
+ IPv6 address, perhaps to circumvent exit policy for IPv4, must be refused.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.3. DNS name resolution of IPv6 addresses (AAAA records)
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In addition to exit support for IPv6 TCP connections, a method to resolve
|
|
|
|
+ domain names to their respective IPv6 addresses is also needed. This is
|
|
|
|
+ accomplished in the existing DNS system via AAAA records. Routers will
|
|
|
|
+ perform both A and AAAA requests when resolving a name so that the client can
|
|
|
|
+ utilize an IPv6 endpoint when available or preferred.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ To avoid potential problems with caching DNS servers that behave poorly all
|
|
|
|
+ NXDOMAIN responses to AAAA requests should be ignored if a successful
|
|
|
|
+ response is received for an A request. This implies that both AAAA and A
|
|
|
|
+ requests will always be performed for each name resolution.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ For reverse lookups on IPv6 addresses, like that used for RESOLVE_PTR, Tor
|
|
|
|
+ will perform the necessary PTR requests via IP6.ARPA.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ All routers which perform DNS resolution on behalf of clients (RELAY_RESOLVE)
|
|
|
|
+ should perform and respond with both A and AAAA resources.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.4. Client interaction with IPv6 exit capability
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.4.1. Usability goals
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ There are a number of behaviors which Tor can provide when interacting with
|
|
|
|
+ clients that will improve the usability of IPv6 exit capability. These
|
|
|
|
+ behaviors are designed to make it simple for clients to express a preference
|
|
|
|
+ for IPv6 transport and utilize IPv6 host services.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.4.2. SOCKSv5 IPv6 client behavior
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ The SOCKS version 5 protocol supports IPv6 connections. When using SOCKSv5
|
|
|
|
+ with hostnames it is difficult to determine if a client wishes to use an IPv4
|
|
|
|
+ or IPv6 address to connect to the desired host if it resolves to both address
|
|
|
|
+ types.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In order to make this more intuitive the SOCKSv5 protocol can be supported on
|
|
|
|
+ a local IPv6 endpoint, [::1] port 9050 for example. When a client requests
|
|
|
|
+ a connection to the desired host via an IPv6 SOCKS connection Tor will prefer
|
|
|
|
+ IPv6 addresses when resolving the host name and connecting to the host.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ Likewise, RESOLVE and RESOLVE_PTR requests from an IPv6 SOCKS connection will
|
|
|
|
+ return IPv6 addresses when available, and fall back to IPv4 addresses if not.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.4.3. MAPADDRESS behavior
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ The MAPADDRESS capability supports clients that may not be able to use the
|
|
|
|
+ SOCKSv4a or SOCKSv5 hostname support to resolve names via Tor. This ability
|
|
|
|
+ should be extended to IPv6 addresses in SOCKSv5 as well.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ When a client requests an address mapping from the wildcard IPv6 address,
|
|
|
|
+ [::0], the server will respond with a unique local IPv6 address on success.
|
|
|
|
+ It is important to note that there may be two mappings for the same name
|
|
|
|
+ if both an IPv4 and IPv6 address are associated with the host. In this case
|
|
|
|
+ a CONNECT to a mapped IPv6 address should prefer IPv6 for the connection to
|
|
|
|
+ the host, if available, while CONNECT to a mapped IPv4 address will prefer
|
|
|
|
+ IPv4.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ It should be noted that IPv6 does not provide the concept of a host local
|
|
|
|
+ subnet, like 127.0.0.0/8 in IPv4. For this reason integration of Tor with
|
|
|
|
+ IPv6 clients should consider a firewall or filter rule to drop unique
|
|
|
|
+ local addresses to or from the network when possible. These packets should
|
|
|
|
+ not be routed, however, keeping them off the subnet entirely is worthwhile.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.4.3.1. Generating unique local IPv6 addresses
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ The usual manner of generating a unique local IPv6 address is to select a
|
|
|
|
+ Global ID part randomly, along with a Subnet ID, and sharing this prefix
|
|
|
|
+ among the communicating parties who each have their own distinct Interface
|
|
|
|
+ ID. In this style a given Tor instance might select a random Global and
|
|
|
|
+ Subnet ID and provide MAPADDRESS assignments with a random Interface ID as
|
|
|
|
+ needed. This has the potential to associate unique Global/Subnet identifiers
|
|
|
|
+ with a given Tor instance and may expose attacks against the anonymity of Tor
|
|
|
|
+ users.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ Tor avoid this potential problem entirely MAPADDRESS must always generate the
|
|
|
|
+ Global, Subnet, and Interface IDs randomly for each request. It is also
|
|
|
|
+ highly suggested that explicitly specifying an IPv6 source address instead of
|
|
|
|
+ the wildcard address not be supported to ensure that a good random address is
|
|
|
|
+ used.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.4.4. DNSProxy IPv6 client behavior
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ A new capability in recent Tor versions is the transparent DNS proxy. This
|
|
|
|
+ feature will need to return both A and AAAA resource records when responding
|
|
|
|
+ to client name resolution requests.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ The transparent DNS proxy should also support reverse lookups for IPv6
|
|
|
|
+ addresses. It is suggested that any such requests to the deprecated IP6.INT
|
|
|
|
+ domain should be translated to IP6.ARPA instead. This translation is not
|
|
|
|
+ likely to be used and is of low priority.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ It would be nice to support DNS over IPv6 transport as well, however, this
|
|
|
|
+ is not likely to be used and is of low priority.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.4.5. TransPort IPv6 client behavior
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ Tor also provides transparent TCP proxy support via the Trans* directives in
|
|
|
|
+ the configuration. The TransListenAddress directive should accept an IPv6
|
|
|
|
+ address in addition to IPv4 so that IPv6 TCP connections can be transparently
|
|
|
|
+ proxied.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+1.5. Additional changes
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ The RedirectExit option should be deprecated rather than extending this
|
|
|
|
+ feature to IPv6.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+2. Spec changes
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+2.1. Tor specification
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In '6.2. Opening streams and transferring data' the following should be
|
|
|
|
+ changed to indicate IPv6 exit capability:
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ "No version of Tor currently generates the IPv6 format."
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In '6.4. Remote hostname lookup' the following should be updated to reflect
|
|
|
|
+ use of ip6.arpa in addition to in-addr.arpa.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ "For a reverse lookup, the OP sends a RELAY_RESOLVE cell containing an
|
|
|
|
+ in-addr.arpa address."
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In 'A.1. Differences between spec and implementation' the following should
|
|
|
|
+ be updated to indicate IPv6 exit capability:
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ "The current codebase has no IPv6 support at all."
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+2.2. Directory specification
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In '2.1. Router descriptor format' a new set of directives is needed for
|
|
|
|
+ IPv6 exit policy. The existing accept/reject directives should be
|
|
|
|
+ clarified to indicate IPv4 or wildcard address relevance. The new IPv6
|
|
|
|
+ directives will be in the form of:
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ "accept6" exitpattern NL
|
|
|
|
+ "reject6" exitpattern NL
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ The section describing accept6/reject6 should explain that the presence
|
|
|
|
+ of accept6 or reject6 exit policies in a router descriptor signals the
|
|
|
|
+ ability of that router to exit IPv6 traffic (according to IPv6 exit
|
|
|
|
+ policies).
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ The "[::]/0" notation is used to represent "all IPv6 addresses". "[::0]/0"
|
|
|
|
+ may also be used for this representation.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ If a user specifies a 'reject6 [::]/0:*' policy in the Tor configuration this
|
|
|
|
+ will be interpreted as forcing no IPv6 exit support and no accept6/reject6
|
|
|
|
+ policies will be included in the published descriptor. This will prevent
|
|
|
|
+ IPv6 exit if the router host has a global unicast IPv6 address present.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ It is important to note that a wildcard address in an accept or reject policy
|
|
|
|
+ applies to both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+2.3. Control specification
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In '3.8. MAPADDRESS' the potential to have to addresses for a given name
|
|
|
|
+ should be explained. The method for generating unique local addresses
|
|
|
|
+ for IPv6 mappings needs explanation as described above.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ When IPv6 addresses are used in this document they should include the
|
|
|
|
+ brackets for consistency. For example, the null IPv6 address should be
|
|
|
|
+ written as "[::0]" and not "::0". The control commands will expect the
|
|
|
|
+ same syntax as well.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In '3.9. GETINFO' the "address" command should return both public IPv4 and
|
|
|
|
+ IPv6 addresses if present. These addresses should be separated via \r\n.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+2.4. Tor SOCKS extensions
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ In '2. Name lookup' a description of IPv6 address resolution is needed for
|
|
|
|
+ SOCKSv5 as described above. IPv6 addresses should be supported in both the
|
|
|
|
+ RESOLVE and RESOLVE_PTR extensions.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ A new section describing the ability to accept SOCKSv5 clients on a local
|
|
|
|
+ IPv6 address to indicate a preference for IPv6 transport as described above
|
|
|
|
+ is also needed. The behavior of Tor SOCKSv5 proxy with an IPv6 preference
|
|
|
|
+ should be explained, for example, preferring IPv6 transport to a named host
|
|
|
|
+ with both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses available (A and AAAA records).
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+3. Questions and concerns
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+3.1. DNS A6 records
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ A6 is explicitly avoided in this document. There are potential reasons for
|
|
|
|
+ implementing this, however, the inherent complexity of the protocol and
|
|
|
|
+ resolvers make this unappealing. Is there a compelling reason to consider
|
|
|
|
+ A6 as part of IPv6 exit support?
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+3.2. IPv4 and IPv6 preference
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ The design above tries to infer a preference for IPv4 or IPv6 transport
|
|
|
|
+ based on client interactions with Tor. It might be useful to provide
|
|
|
|
+ more explicit control over this preference. For example, an IPv4 SOCKSv5
|
|
|
|
+ client may want to use IPv6 transport to named hosts in CONNECT requests
|
|
|
|
+ while the current implementation would assume an IPv4 preference. Should
|
|
|
|
+ more explicit control be available, through either configuration directives
|
|
|
|
+ or control commands?
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ This can be worked around by resolving names and then CONNECTing to an IPv4
|
|
|
|
+ or IPv6 address as desired, however, not all client applications may have
|
|
|
|
+ this option available.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+3.3. Support for IPv6 only clients
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ It may be useful to support IPv6 only clients using IPv4 mapped IPv6
|
|
|
|
+ addresses. This would require transparent DNS proxy using IPv6
|
|
|
|
+ transport and the ability to map A record responses into IPv4 mapped
|
|
|
|
+ IPv6 addresses. The transparent TCP proxy would thus need to detect these
|
|
|
|
+ mapped addresses and connect to the desired IPv4 host.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ The relative lack of any IPv6 only hosts or applications makes this a lot of
|
|
|
|
+ work for very little gain. Is there a compelling reason to support this
|
|
|
|
+ capability?
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+3.4. IPv6 DNS and older Tor routers
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ It is expected that many routers will continue to run with older versions of
|
|
|
|
+ Tor when the IPv6 exit capability is released. Clients who wish to use IPv6
|
|
|
|
+ will need to route RELAY_RESOLVE requests to the newer routers which will
|
|
|
|
+ respond with both A and AAAA resource records when possible.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ One way to do this is to route RELAY_RESOLVE requests to routers with IPv6
|
|
|
|
+ exit policies published, however, this would not utilize current routers
|
|
|
|
+ that can resolve IPv6 addresses even if they can't exit such traffic.
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+4. Addendum
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+4.1. Sample IPv6 default exit policy
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ reject 0.0.0.0/8
|
|
|
|
+ reject 169.254.0.0/16
|
|
|
|
+ reject 127.0.0.0/8
|
|
|
|
+ reject 192.168.0.0/16
|
|
|
|
+ reject 10.0.0.0/8
|
|
|
|
+ reject 172.16.0.0/12
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [0000::]/8
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [0100::]/8
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [0200::]/7
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [0400::]/6
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [0800::]/5
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [1000::]/4
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [4000::]/3
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [6000::]/3
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [8000::]/3
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [A000::]/3
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [C000::]/3
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [E000::]/4
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [F000::]/5
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [F800::]/6
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [FC00::]/7
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [FE00::]/9
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [FE80::]/10
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [FEC0::]/10
|
|
|
|
+ reject6 [FF00::]/8
|
|
|
|
+ reject *:25
|
|
|
|
+ reject *:119
|
|
|
|
+ reject *:135-139
|
|
|
|
+ reject *:445
|
|
|
|
+ reject *:1214
|
|
|
|
+ reject *:4661-4666
|
|
|
|
+ reject *:6346-6429
|
|
|
|
+ reject *:6699
|
|
|
|
+ reject *:6881-6999
|
|
|
|
+ accept *:*
|
|
|
|
+ # accept6 [2000::]/3:* is implied
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+4.2. Additional resources
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ 'DNS Extensions to Support IP Version 6'
|
|
|
|
+ http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3596.txt
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ 'DNS Extensions to Support IPv6 Address Aggregation and Renumbering'
|
|
|
|
+ http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2874.txt
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ 'SOCKS Protocol Version 5'
|
|
|
|
+ http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1928.txt
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ 'Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses'
|
|
|
|
+ http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4193.txt
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
+ 'INTERNET PROTOCOL VERSION 6 ADDRESS SPACE'
|
|
|
|
+ http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-address-space
|
|
|
|
+
|