Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 315: Updating the list of fields required in directory documents

2020-05-11 Thread Nick Mathewson
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 5:26 PM teor wrote: > > Hi Nick, > > This proposal is missing the "bridge" case. > > Bridges are more complicated, because we have at least > 3 kinds of bridges: > * bridges distributed by BridgeDB > * bridges distributed with apps (such as Tor Browser) > * private bridges

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 315: Updating the list of fields required in directory documents

2020-04-23 Thread teor
Hi Nick, This proposal is missing the "bridge" case. Bridges are more complicated, because we have at least 3 kinds of bridges: * bridges distributed by BridgeDB * bridges distributed with apps (such as Tor Browser) * private bridges Bridge option transitions are also more complicated, because

[tor-dev] Proposal 315: Updating the list of fields required in directory documents

2020-04-23 Thread Nick Mathewson
Filename: 315-update-dir-required-fields.txt Title: Updating the list of fields required in directory documents Author: Nick Mathewson Created: 23 April 2020 Status: Open 1. Introduction When we add a new field to a directory document, we must at first describe it as "optional", since