But why not just use TCP in the first place?
Why limit services to the most bandwidth consuming kinds of sockets? Olof
On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:30:11 +0000, Olof Tangrot wrote:
But why not just use TCP in the first place?
Why limit services to the most bandwidth consuming kinds of sockets?
Because the bandwith picture looks different once you try to onion route it. Also, just tcp gets you a lot farther than just udp, so it's obvious which one to do first, and, by extension, only. Andreas -- "Totally trivial. Famous last words." From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@*.org> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800
On 4/20/16, Olof Tangrot <olof.tangrot@gmail.com> wrote:
Ok, my lets regard UDP as a design constraint on the client side. Then how do I route the traffic to the onion-host?
https://www.onioncat.org/ https://www.cypherpunk.at/onioncat_trac/ FYI: The onioncat folks are interested in collaborating with tor folks regarding prop224. https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/proposals/224-rend-spec-ng.tx...
Hi grarpamp, I'm interested in what kind of collaboration onioncat would like to do on prop224, next-generation hidden services. It would be great to work this out in the next few weeks, as we're coding parts of the proposal right now. But the tor-onions mailing list is to discuss the technical details running onion services. Can we discuss onioncat, tor, and the development of prop224 on tor-dev mailing list? Tim Tim Wilson-Brown (teor) teor2345 at gmail dot com PGP 968F094B ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
participants (4)
-
Andreas Krey -
grarpamp -
Olof Tangrot -
Tim Wilson-Brown - teor