|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
|
|
|
+Filename: 118-multiple-orports.txt
|
|
|
+Title: Advertising multiple ORPorts at once
|
|
|
+Version: $Revision$
|
|
|
+Last-Modified: $Date$
|
|
|
+Author: Nick Mathewson
|
|
|
+Created: 09-Jul-2007
|
|
|
+Status: Needs-Research
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+Some notes follow. Please feel free to flesh them out, discard them,
|
|
|
+add in better ideas, etc.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ - Some way to configure which address:port combinations to listen
|
|
|
+ on, and/or which to advertise.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ (The best way to support lots of ports is to have your firewall
|
|
|
+ route all connections from those ports to Tor: this doesn't need
|
|
|
+ anywhere near as many listening sockets. You only really want to
|
|
|
+ listen on tons and tons of ports if your firewalling doesn't
|
|
|
+ support this, or you don't have access to your local
|
|
|
+ iptables/ipf/whatever. But if you want to do this with the
|
|
|
+ firewall, you need the ability to advertise ports you aren't
|
|
|
+ actually listening on.)
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ (Cat would also like to see some discussion of the effect this
|
|
|
+ is likely to have in environments that need to ban or limit Tor.
|
|
|
+ "Speaking only for myself, in an environment where I need to keep
|
|
|
+ a lid on Tor usage, having to chase port settings around makes it
|
|
|
+ more likely that I'm going to move from limiting Tor to just plain
|
|
|
+ banning it.")
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ - Some way to advertise in one's router descriptor which
|
|
|
+ address:port combinations you're listening on. For backward
|
|
|
+ compatibility this should be a new line, not a change to the
|
|
|
+ format of an existing line.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ - Possibly, some way to relay this information in network-status
|
|
|
+ documents.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ - Some analysis of the impact on network-status and routerinfo
|
|
|
+ size. My guess is "not much", but if it turns out to be a bit, we
|
|
|
+ should look into making the notation concise.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ - What does this imply for self-testing of servers and testing by
|
|
|
+ authorities of servers? What should the authorities do if one
|
|
|
+ addr:port works but one doesn't?
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ - Some way to pick which addr:port to use when you have a choice of
|
|
|
+ more than one addr:port.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ - Some way to avoid having servers open lots and lots of connections
|
|
|
+ between them when they get extend cells to the same server on
|
|
|
+ different ports.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ - How this all interacts with coderman's ipv6 stuff (proposal 117).
|
|
|
+
|
Roger Dingledine