[tor-dev] Special-use-TLD support

Christian Grothoff grothoff at gnunet.org
Tue Sep 29 07:10:00 UTC 2015

On 09/29/2015 12:19 AM, Jeff Burdges wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-09-28 at 16:26 -0400, Roger Dingledine wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 03:20:47PM +0200, Jeff Burdges wrote:
>>> I proposed that Tor implement NameService rules using UNIX domain
>>> sockets, or ports, since that's how GNUNet works, but maybe Tor
>>> should
>>> instead launch a helper application it communicates with via stdin
>>> and
>>> stdout.  I donno if that'll work well on Windows however.
>> If you're to be running a second program that does the "resolves",
>> then
>> I think you should really think about adding a third program that
>> talks
>> to Tor on the control port and does all of these rewrites via the
>> control
>> protocol without needing any further Tor modifications. (If you
>> wanted,
>> you could make these second and third programs be just one program.)
>> This is I believe how Jesse's "OnioNS" tool works at present: you
>> connect
>> to the control port (e.g. via a Stem script), tell Tor that you want
>> to
>> decide what to do with each new stream (set __LeaveStreamsUnattached
>> to
>> 1), and then you let Tor pick (attachstream to 0) for all the streams
>> except the special ones. When you see a new special stream, you do
>> the
>> lookup or resolve or whatever on your side, then REDIRECTSTREAM the
>> stream to become the new address, then yield control of the stream
>> back
>> to Tor so Tor picks a circuit for it.
>> The main downside here is that you need to run a new Tor controller.
>> But
>> if you're already needing to run a separate program, you should be
>> all set.
>> What am I missing?
> Very interesting.  Yes, this sounds reasonable in the short run.  In
> the longer run, there are several people with an interest in
> externalizing Tor's DNS handling, which changes things.  I'll check out
> OnioNS and discuss this with people at the meeting.  

Also, as you see from str4d's message, there are other projects
interested in having a new name resolution *API* to access Namecoin,
GNS, DNSSEC etc. Thus, it makes more sense to define a new name
resolution service that all of those can use, instead of a Tor-specific

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/attachments/20150929/4d844204/attachment.sig>

More information about the tor-dev mailing list