> On 7 Jul 2015, at 07:48, Karsten Loesing <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 07/07/15 03:45, teor wrote: >> >>>> On 7 Jul 2015, at 09:46 , [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> From the perspective of someone investigating abuse, I think >>>> it's important that 'not an exit relay' means 'not capable of >>>> exiting on any port at all'. Ergo I think your option c) is the >>>> way to go. >>> >>> I also think this (c) is the best option. I agree that it's >>> important to be able to determine, from an investigatory >>> perspective, whether or not a relay was capable of exiting on any >>> port. > > Okay, let's do c). > >> And, if we are going to implement "Exit" as any port, it should >> also be *any* IP, not just an IPv4 /8 as in the Ext flag >> definition. > > For c), we'd just check if there's a "p reject 1-65535" line or not. >
I think this is a perfectly OK way of doing this considering the use case. > Here's the updated design mockup: > > https://people.torproject.org/~karsten/volatile/exonerator-mockup/ Looks great Karsten, good job! Regards, Joshua Lee Tucker @tuckerwales _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
