Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Jeff Burdges wrote: > Very interesting. Yes, this sounds reasonable in the short run. In > the longer run, there are several people with an interest in > externalizing Tor's DNS handling, which changes things. I'll > check out OnioNS and discuss

Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

Special-use TLDs is the official name, according to someone or other attached to DNS. I'd rate that good enough. Afaik, there is actually no coherent name for these naming system meant to compete with DNS. Arguably, the most logical approach would be to genericize the DNS trademark and

Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/27/2015 02:47 PM, Jeff Burdges wrote: > > This is the first of two torspec proposals to help Tor > work with Sepcial-Use TLDs, like the GNU Name system or > NameCoin. The second part will be an anycast facility. - Jeff > Jeff, I'd be

Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

On Sun, 2015-09-27 at 19:47 +0200, Jeff Burdges wrote: ... > Configuration > ... > NameService [.]dnspath socketspec > [noncannonical] [timeout=num] > [-- service specific options] > > We require that socketspec be either the path to a UNIX domain > socket > or an address of

Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 03:20:47PM +0200, Jeff Burdges wrote: > I proposed that Tor implement NameService rules using UNIX domain > sockets, or ports, since that's how GNUNet works, but maybe Tor should > instead launch a helper application it communicates with via stdin and > stdout. I donno if

[tor-dev] Reminder for weekly OONI dev meeting Monday 2015-09-28 17:00 UTC (19:00 CET)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hello, This is a reminder that today there will be the weekly OONI meeting. It will happen as usual on the #ooni channel on irc.oftc.net at 17:00 UTC (19:00 CET, 13:00 EST, 10:00 PST). Everybody is welcome to join us and bring their questions and

Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

> On 28 Sep 2015, at 15:20, Jeff Burdges wrote: > >> Are multiple NameSubstitution rules applied in the order they are >> listed? >> >> For example: >> NameSubstitution .com .net >> NameSubstitution .example.net .example.org >>

Re: [tor-dev] Simplifying load balancing by removing Guard+Exit?

> This would be a 24% decrease in the number of Guards, which seems ok, > particularly if they’re not good at being guards anyway. > (Counts from the 2015-09-24 21:00:00 microdesc consensus in my local Tor > Browser data folder.) Relays with the Guard+Exit flags have had zero weight as guards

[tor-dev] Interruption in patch workshop and (online) tor dev meeting this week

Hi, all! I hope things are going well for you. This week, many tor developers are all at a meeting in Berlin. So, there will probably be far fewer people than usual at the Tuesday patch workshop time or at the Wednesday tor status meeting. We should be back as usual next week! peace, -- Nick

Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 09/28/2015 01:34 PM, Jeff Burdges wrote: > On Sun, 2015-09-27 at 22:31 +, Jeremy Rand wrote: >> >> Hi Jeff, >> >> Thanks for working on this; Namecoin is definitely interested in >> this effort. I have one comment. SPV-based Namecoin

Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

On Sun, 2015-09-27 at 23:32 +0200, Tim Wilson-Brown - teor wrote: > I have some questions about how NameSubstitution rules work in some > edge cases: In truth, I originally wrote the NameSubstitution rules bit for the .gnu TLD. In the end, Christian explained why that doesn't work, mostly that

Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

On Sun, 2015-09-27 at 22:31 +, Jeremy Rand wrote: > On 09/27/2015 05:47 PM, Jeff Burdges wrote: > > > > This is the first of two torspec proposals to help Tor work with > > Sepcial-Use TLDs, like the GNU Name system or NameCoin. The second > > part will be an anycast facility. - Jeff > >

Re: [tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

On Mon, 2015-09-28 at 00:05 +0200, Tom van der Woerdt wrote: > Questions : > * are those directives handled on the relay or the client? If relay, > how will the client know which node to talk to? They route name resolution requests on the client to another piece of software on the client. That