[tor-bugs] #12138 [Tor]: No IPv6 support when suggesting a bindaddr to a PT

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#12138: No IPv6 support when suggesting a bindaddr to a PT
------------------------+--------------------------------
     Reporter:  asn     |      Owner:
         Type:  defect  |     Status:  new
     Priority:  normal  |  Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.6.x-final
    Component:  Tor     |    Version:
   Resolution:          |   Keywords:  tor-pt tor-bridge
Actual Points:          |  Parent ID:
       Points:          |
------------------------+--------------------------------

Comment (by yawning):

 Replying to [ticket:12138 asn]:
 > Instead of using `fmt_addr32(INADDR_ANY)`, we should use `fmt_addrport`
 and suggest `[::]` if we need to use IPv6. We should probably suggest an
 IPv6 address, if our ORPort is IPv6 (what if we have both kinds of
 ORPorts?).

 If the ORPort is *just* IPv6, then suggesting `[::]` should be fine, ditto
 the opposite, but I don't think that's all that useful.

 > Implementation of this should not be hard. I can do it one of these
 days.

 Before deciding on what to do (unless it's just special casing a bridge
 that only provides IPv6 service), we really should figure out how to make
 pluggable transports play nice in dual stack configs before fixing this
 (See: #11211).

 In the short term, if people *really* want to setup an IPv6 bridge, they
 can specify `ServerTransportListenAddr` and get a bridge that only works
 over IPv6 for the specified transport.

 But at least as of right now, I think it's safe to assume that when people
 say "IPv6" they mean "IPv6 in addition to IPv4", so the hack won't be
 sufficient in the majority of the deployment scenarios.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/12138#comment:2>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online