On 02/09/2012 12:24 AM, Jacob Appelbaum wrote: > On 02/08/2012 11:47 PM, Ondrej Mikle wrote: >> On 02/08/2012 02:59 AM, Nick Mathewson wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Ondrej Mikle <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I think if we want an extra field in the future, we want to put it >>> after the end of the response (that is, after total_len), rather than >>> having it be optionally in every cell. >> >> OK. >> >>>> That also means AXFR/IXFR would be off limits (I'm OK with that). >>> >>> Me too. >> >> Without AXFR/IXFR we could limit total_len to 2 octets. > > I'd really like to be able to AXFR. I think it's important to have Tor's > DNSPort able to do some of the most basic and common DNS stuff.
What about making a specialized tool for AXFR/IXFR (like tor-resolve)? Its interface could be listening for DNS packets and returning DNS-stream with AXFR/IXFR data. Since practically every DNS server open to AXFR/IXRF must listen on TCP, this can be much easier implemented using the already existing TCP tunneling in Tor. I think this solution would make the rest of design simpler. Ondrej _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
