Proposal 105 (handshake revision) needs more thought

Watson Ladd watsonbladd at
Sun Mar 11 23:30:11 UTC 2007

Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2007 at 07:11:53PM -0400, Watson Ladd wrote:
>> Won't the use of a VERSION cell prevent the use of a low-latency
>> protocol since we will be waiting for the VERSION cell before going
>> forwards with the handshake?
> What the heck is a "low-latency protocol"?
One that requires fewer round trips by shrinking handshake sizes to the
point where they can be combined.
> Also, notice that this is the TLS handshake we're talking about here.
> Not the circuit handshake.
Ok, that makes sense now
> --Roger

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the tor-dev mailing list