On 12 Apr 2016, at 10:49, Ivan Markin twim@riseup.net wrote:
David Goulet:
It's a bit weird to have to enable two options for one feature (single onion) BUT I like the double torrc option forcing the users to understand what's going on (also adding semantic to the config file).
Bikesheding: the name though could be a bit misleading. What if that tor process is also used as a client to "wget" stuff on the server for instance. Won't I be confused if NonAnonymousMode is _set_ not knowing it applies to what? Idea: "HiddenServiceNonAnonymousMode 1". Pretty explicit that it's for the service.
I don't think using doubled option will force people to understand what's happening. Most probable outcome is that two-option requirement will look just "strange". It's strange because it's vague. I agree with David, something like "NonAnonymousOnionServiceMode 1" should be enough. It looks pretty clear and simple. [NB: a service cannot be Hidden and NonAnonymous at the same time :) ]
We tried adding NonAnonymous to the name, and it was unwieldy. And it also confuses the semantics: what if we have multiple types of SingleOnionMode?
Also, see my reply to David, where I explain that NonAnonymousMode applies to the entire tor instance, including things that are totally unrelated to Single Onion Services, like whether you can open a SOCKSPort or run Tor2Web.
We could add a compilation option --enable-single-onion-mode instead of NonAnonymousMode, but I think making Single Onion Service operators compile their own tor is unnecessary.
Tim
-- Ivan Markin _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)
teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n