On January 31, 2017 12:17:00 AM PST, fr33d0m4all wrote:
>Hi,
>this is not really a Tor issue, but I'd like to know if there is
>someone
>else like me that is having problems upgrading his Tor installation to
>the latest version on its Raspberry (running Raspbian based on
"iff" is shorthand for "if and only if", as opposed to "if [and maybe
otherwise]"
On 02/03/2017 12:16 AM, anondroid wrote:
>> I was wondering what the minimum exit policy was (wrt port 80 and 443) for a
>> Tor exit relay.
>
> https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt#n2294
>
> On 3 Feb 2017, at 16:16, anondroid wrote:
>
> > I was wondering what the minimum exit policy was (wrt port 80 and 443) for
> > a Tor exit relay.
>
> https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt#n2294
>
> "A router is called an 'Exit' iff it allows exits
> I was wondering what the minimum exit policy was (wrt port 80 and 443) for a
> Tor exit relay.
https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt#n2294
"A router is called an 'Exit' iff it allows exits to at least two of the ports
80, 443, and 6667 and allows exits to at least one
Hey all,
I was wondering what the minimum exit policy was (wrt port 80 and 443) for
a Tor exit relay. I
cant find any documentation about the minimum exit policy.
Is it possible to have an exit relay exit only to a /16 or a /8 on port 80
and 443?
I've tried having an exit policy that allows
On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 11:05:23AM +1100, teor wrote:
>
> > On 31 Jan 2017, at 20:21, nusenu wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > nusenu:
> >> tldr: would you send me your torrc if you aim to route IPv6 exit traffic
> >> and are in the list at the bottom with the third colmn set to