[tor-bugs] #27325 [Core Tor/Tor]: Rework NETINFO cell parsing and generation with trunnel

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#27325: Rework NETINFO cell parsing and generation with trunnel
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
 Reporter:  rl1987                               |          Owner:  rl1987
     Type:  enhancement                          |         Status:
                                                 |  needs_revision
 Priority:  Medium                               |      Milestone:  Tor:
                                                 |  0.4.0.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor                         |        Version:
 Severity:  Normal                               |     Resolution:
 Keywords:  trunnel wireformat heartbleed-       |  Actual Points:
  safety security parsing                        |
Parent ID:  #27143                               |         Points:
 Reviewer:  dgoulet                              |        Sponsor:
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Changes (by dgoulet):

 * status:  needs_review => needs_revision


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:12 rl1987]:
 > Well I'm not talking about making changes in how Tor protocols ''de
 facto'' works and what wire format is actually being used. What I mean is
 to change is to reword section 4.5 to be more precise about what is in the
 address part of NETINFO cell and refrain from mentioning section 6.4, as
 that's confusingly says that we're reusing wire format fragment from
 RELAY_RESOLVED cell in NETINFO cell (which is a shaky claim, for reasons
 outlined above).

 Ok I think this is a wise thing to do. This means that the NETINFO address
 format becomes specific to the NETINFO cell and thus needs its own
 specification in tor-spec.txt. I'm fine with that and less hackish then
 "check other section but minus one field and also ignore some Types"...

 >
 > I propose to keep netinfo.trunnel as it is now, and also merge the
 following patch to torspec:
 > * https://github.com/torproject/torspec/pull/46

 This is basically it but I would use the syntax from section 5.1.2 for
 example. The HS specs do use that syntax all around and it is much nicer
 and clearer. Ultimately, we want tor-spec.txt to all follow the same style
 and that one from section 5.1.2 is a step in the right direction.

 We should be good to go with that code with such a spec change ^ I
 believe.

 Thanks!

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/27325#comment:14>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online