[tor-bugs] #4960 [Tor Relay]: Investigate NAT-piercing approaches for relays and bridges

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#4960: Investigate NAT-piercing approaches for relays and bridges
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  karsten    |          Owner:  ioerror                
     Type:  project    |         Status:  new                    
 Priority:  normal     |      Milestone:  Sponsor F: July 1, 2012
Component:  Tor Relay  |        Version:                         
 Keywords:             |         Parent:                         
   Points:             |   Actualpoints:                         
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------

Comment(by cypherpunks):

 You may have already corrected some (or all) of these, but just in case:

 * In section 2, first paragraph, the last sentence, it may be more clear
 if the second dash is replaced with a comma.
 * Second para, last word, single period?
 * Third para, In general should be followed by a comma
 * Third para, last sentence, in "NAT devices allow for services to
 reachable behind the NAT device"  s/services to reachable/services to be
 reachable/
 * Fifth para, the use of former and latter seems unclear. Does former
 refer to STUN, TURN,... and latter refer to UPnP and NAT-PMP?
 * In section 3, s/Autonomous NAT traversal/Autonomous NAT Traversal/
 * In section 4, s/UPnP forum/UPnP Forum
 * Also in sect 4, add commas around clarifying phrase, s/the second but
 still extremely common protocol is the Apple standard NAT-PMP/the second,
 but still extremely common protocol, is the Apple standard NAT-PMP
 * Sect 4, second para, back-to-back sentences start with While
 * In section 5, second para, s/tor/Tor  -- actually it just caught my eye
 that the use of Tor is non-uniform, should it be italicized and
 capitalized?
 * Section 6: Do any distros (Debian, Red Hat) compile in UPnP support by
 default? If so, should this be mentioned?
 * Section 8: This may be tangential, but what if the user is running dual
 stack IPv4/IPv6? If a Tor bridge is compiled with tor-fw-helper, will it
 realize there is a v4 interface and pierce the firewall or will it check
 for v6 and automatically not run?
 * In References, s/Autonomous nat traversal/Autonomous NAT Traversal/

 * General critique: You mention that you assume the reader is familiar
 with the Grothoff et al. paper, but should you also say that it would be
 beneficial for the user to be familiar with the general ideas used by UPnP
 and/or NAT-PMP?

 Nice paper overall. Thanks for writing it.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/4960#comment:8>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online