|
|
@@ -40,8 +40,8 @@ N . Document transport and natdport
|
|
|
o In man page
|
|
|
- In a good HOWTO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
- - Update dir-spec with decisions made on these issues:
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
+Things we'd like to do in 0.2.0.x:
|
|
|
+ - Update dir-spec with decisions made on these issues:
|
|
|
o clients don't log as loudly when they receive them
|
|
|
o they don't count toward the 3-strikes rule
|
|
|
D But eventually, we give up after getting a lot of 503s.
|
|
|
@@ -53,9 +53,11 @@ N . Document transport and natdport
|
|
|
D They can 503 client descriptor requests when they feel like it.
|
|
|
How can they distinguish? Not implemented for now, maybe
|
|
|
should abandon.
|
|
|
- - update dir-spec with what we decided for each of these
|
|
|
+ - describe our 302 not modified behaviors.
|
|
|
+ - and document a bit more -- e.g. it looks like we return an empty
|
|
|
+ 200 OK when somebody asks us for a networkstatus and we don't
|
|
|
+ have it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Things we'd like to do in 0.2.0.x:
|
|
|
- Proposals:
|
|
|
. 101: Voting on the Tor Directory System (plus 103)
|
|
|
o Prepare ASAP for new voting formats
|
|
|
@@ -210,15 +212,11 @@ Things we'd like to do in 0.2.0.x:
|
|
|
- Write a proposal
|
|
|
- Bridges users (rudimentary version)
|
|
|
o Ability to specify bridges manually
|
|
|
- - cache of bridges that we've learned about and use but aren't
|
|
|
- manually listed in the torrc.
|
|
|
- D and some mechanism for specifying that we want to stop using
|
|
|
- a given bridge in this cache.
|
|
|
- . Config option 'UseBridges' that bridge users can turn on.
|
|
|
- - uses bridges as first hop rather than entry guards.
|
|
|
- D Do we want to maintain our own set of entryguards that we use
|
|
|
- after the bridge? Open research question; let's say no for 0.2.0
|
|
|
- unless we learn otherwise.
|
|
|
+ o Config option 'UseBridges' that bridge users can turn on.
|
|
|
+ o uses bridges as first hop rather than entry guards.
|
|
|
+ D Do we want to maintain our own set of entryguards that we use as
|
|
|
+ next hop after the bridge? Open research question; let's say no
|
|
|
+ for 0.2.0 unless we learn otherwise.
|
|
|
o if you don't have any routerinfos for your bridges, or you don't
|
|
|
like the ones you have, ask a new bridge for its server/authority.
|
|
|
. Ask all directory questions to bridge via BEGIN_DIR.
|
|
|
@@ -226,9 +224,13 @@ Things we'd like to do in 0.2.0.x:
|
|
|
N - Design/implement the "local-status" or something like it, from the
|
|
|
"Descriptor purposes: how to tell them apart" section of
|
|
|
http://archives.seul.org/or/dev/May-2007/msg00008.html
|
|
|
+ - cache of bridges that we've learned about and use but aren't
|
|
|
+ manually listed in the torrc.
|
|
|
+ D and some mechanism for specifying that we want to stop using
|
|
|
+ a given bridge in this cache.
|
|
|
- timeout and retry schedules for fetching bridge descriptors
|
|
|
- give extend_info_t a router_purpose again
|
|
|
- - react faster to download networkstatuses after the first bridge
|
|
|
+ o react faster to download networkstatuses after the first bridge
|
|
|
descriptor arrives
|
|
|
- be more robust to bridges being marked as down and leaving us
|
|
|
stranded without any known "running" bridges.
|
|
|
@@ -238,6 +240,7 @@ N - Design/implement the "local-status" or something like it, from the
|
|
|
- Fix BEGIN_DIR so that you connect to bridge of which you only
|
|
|
know IP (and optionally fingerprint), and then use BEGIN_DIR to learn
|
|
|
more about it.
|
|
|
+ - look at server_mode() and decide if it always applies to bridges too.
|
|
|
- Bridges authorities (rudimentary version)
|
|
|
o Rudimentary "do not publish networkstatus" option for bridge
|
|
|
authorities.
|
Roger Dingledine