| 1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677787980818283848586878889 | 
							
- 0. Overview.
 
-    This document contains various informal policies for how to operate
 
-    a directory authority, how to choose new ones, etc.
 
- 1. How to pick a new directory authority.
 
-    Here's our current guidelines for how to pick new directory
 
-    authorities.
 
-    (These won't ever be formal criteria -- we need to keep this flexible
 
-    so we can adapt to new situations.)
 
-    o Stability:
 
-      - Must be a low-downtime Tor server (computer as well as network).
 
-      - Must have a static IP.
 
-      - The operator must have been running a stable Tor server for at least
 
-        3 months.
 
-      - Must intend for this server to stick around for the next 12 months
 
-        or more.
 
-      - Must not hibernate.
 
-      - Should not be an exit node (as this increases the risk both of
 
-        downtime and of key compromise).
 
-    o Performance:
 
-      - Must have sufficient bandwidth: at least 10mbit/s symmetric,
 
-        though in practice the inbound traffic can be considerably less.
 
-    o Availability:
 
-      - Must be available to upgrade within a few days in most cases.
 
-        (While we're still developing Tor, we periodically find bugs that
 
-        impact the whole network and require authority upgrades.)
 
-      - Should have a well-known way to contact the administrator
 
-        via PGP-encrypted message.
 
-    o Integrity:
 
-      - Must promise not to censor or attack the network and users.
 
-      - Should be run by somebody that Tor (i.e. Roger) knows.
 
-      - Should be widely regarded as fair/trustworthy, or at least
 
-        known, by many people.
 
-      - If somebody asks you to backdoor or change your server, legally or
 
-        otherwise, you will fight it to the extent of your abilities. If
 
-        you fail to fight it, you must shut down the Tor server and notify
 
-        us that you have.
 
-    o Diversity
 
-      - We should avoid situations that make it likelier for multiple
 
-        authority failures to happen at the same time.  Therefore...
 
-        - It's good when authorities are not all in the same country.
 
-        - It's good when authorities are not all in the same jurisdictions.
 
-        - It's good when authorities are not all running the same OS.
 
-        - It's good when authorities are not all using the same ISP.
 
-        - It's good when authorities are not all running the same
 
-          version of Tor.
 
-        - No two authorities should have the same operator.
 
-      - Maximal diversity, however, is not always practical.  Sometimes,
 
-        for example, there is only one version of Tor that provides a
 
-        given consensus generation algorithm.
 
-      - A small group of authorities with the same country/jurisdiction/OS is
 
-        not a problem, until that group's size approaches quorum (half the
 
-        authorities).
 
- 2. How to choose the recommended versions
 
-   The policy, in a nutshell, is to not remove versions without a good
 
-   reason. So this means we should recommend all versions except:
 
-   - Versions that no longer conform to the spec. That is, if they wouldn't
 
-     actually interact correctly with the current Tor network.
 
-   - Versions that have known security problems.
 
-   - Versions that have frequent crash or assert problems.
 
-   - Versions that harm the performance or stability of the current Tor
 
-     network or the anonymity of other users. For example, a version
 
-     that load balances wrong, or a version that hammers the authorities
 
-     too much.
 
- > some use the slight variant of requiring a *good* reason.
 
- > excellent reasons include "there's a security flaw"
 
- > good reasons include "that crashes every time you start it. you would think
 
- +tor is dumb if you tried to use that version and think of it as tor."
 
- > good reasons include "those old clients do their load balancing wrong, and
 
- +they're screwing up the whole network"
 
- > reasons include "the old one is really slow, clients should prefer the new
 
- +one"
 
- > i try to draw the line at 'good reasons and above'
 
 
  |