Browse Source

Integrate more feedback from IRC

- For now we are only talking about moving clients to be bridges

- Some questions on how we should inform users
Steven Murdoch 15 years ago
parent
commit
ac55247350
1 changed files with 13 additions and 0 deletions
  1. 13 0
      doc/spec/proposals/ideas/xxx-automatic-node-promotion.txt

+ 13 - 0
doc/spec/proposals/ideas/xxx-automatic-node-promotion.txt

@@ -14,6 +14,11 @@ Target:
    preferences. The proposal also defines the new controller messages
    preferences. The proposal also defines the new controller messages
    and options which will control this process.
    and options which will control this process.
 
 
+   Note that for the moment, only transitions between client and
+   bridge are being considered. Transitions to public relay will
+   be considered at a future date, but will use the same
+   infrastructure for measuring capacity and reliability.
+
 2. Motivation and history
 2. Motivation and history
 
 
    Tor has a growing user-base and one of the major impediments to the
    Tor has a growing user-base and one of the major impediments to the
@@ -108,3 +113,11 @@ Target:
    - Perhaps the bridge authority should tell potential bridges
    - Perhaps the bridge authority should tell potential bridges
      whether to enable themselves, by taking into account whether
      whether to enable themselves, by taking into account whether
      their IP address is blocked
      their IP address is blocked
+
+   - How do we explain the possible risks of running a bridge/relay
+     * Use of bandwidth/congestion
+     * Publication of IP address
+     * Blocking from IRC (even for non-exit relays)
+
+   - What feedback should we give to bridge relays, to encourage then
+     e.g. number of recent users (what about reserve bridges)?