[tor-bugs] #3785 [Tor Relay]: Revise/refine proposal 118 and implement it

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#3785: Revise/refine proposal 118 and implement it
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  ln5        |          Owner:  nickm             
     Type:  task       |         Status:  accepted          
 Priority:  normal     |      Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.3.x-final
Component:  Tor Relay  |        Version:                    
 Keywords:             |         Parent:  #3563             
   Points:             |   Actualpoints:                    
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------

Comment(by nickm):

 Replying to [comment:4 ln5]:
 > How bad is it to advertise an addr:port without self-testing it first?

 For a bridge, bad, but not terrible.

 Replying to [comment:5 ln5]:
 > The proposal seems to have discontinued the 'auto' argument for the
 > ORPort option. Wouldn't that break old configuration pretty badly?

 I think that's an oversight; we should continue to support auto.  I'll try
 to edit the proposal soon in light of that and other comments.

 Replying to [comment:6 ln]:
 > But 'ORPort <port>' binds only to the IPv4 address

 Hm. What about ORPort <port> IPv6Only , or ORPort [::]:<port> ?

 One of the hard-to-implement thing in proposal 186 is the ability to have
 one ORPort directory specify more than one actual port; it will break the
 current one-to-one relation between listener sockets, port_cfg_t entries,
 and ORPort lines.  (So it's _doable_, but not necessarily fun.)

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/3785#comment:7>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online