Hi,

> On 12 Aug 2019, at 10:46, Christopher Sheats <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> The second issue we have with running a secondary IP per Tor process is 
> system load. Having more IPs opens more sockets, and we are already putting a 
> lot of load on these multi-core servers.

In the next few months, we want to add support for the Rust ed25519-dalek 
library in Tor. (It's currently our best candidate for useful but optional Rust 
code.)

Having faster crypto should reduce the need for more tor instances.

> ...
> 
> IPv4 dependency is a real burden. We would like to see Tor Project help Tor 
> network operators more directly, both financially and securing IPv4 scopes 
> for nonprofit organizations to take ownership of. The latter is needed until 
> we can stop using IPv4 completely and operate only with IPv6.

In general, The Tor Project Inc. tries to avoid operating Tor network 
infrastructure. So IPv4 netblock allocations are a good task for individual 
volunteers, and Torservers and similar organisations.

> It is discouraging to see so many small and large network operators not using 
> IPv6. Why is this such a problem?

Tor relays don't automatically detect IPv6 addresses, and they don't test the 
reachability of IPv6 ORPorts. We are working on a grant application to add this 
support in Tor. (It's more complex than it seems, because we need to split the 
reachability checks per-ORPort, and add IPv6 extend support to Tor relays.)

> Tor Project, please increase your #IPv6 awareness/outreach similar to how 
> ARIN and the other RIRs try very hard to do.

I'll add an awareness objective to our grant application.

T

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

Reply via email to