[tor-dev] New Proposal 306: A Tor Implementation of IPv6 Happy Eyeballs

[Neel Chauhan]

Just a reminder that this proposal (Prop306) needs to be reviewed: 
https://github.com/torproject/torspec/pull/87

-Neel

===

https://www.neelc.org/

On 2019-07-21 10:30, neel at neelc.org wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have split up the sections. The GitHub PR is here:
> 
> https://github.com/torproject/torspec/pull/87
> 
> This was done as a fixup commit. If you want a new PR, please let me 
> know.
> 
> -Neel
> 
> ===
> 
> https://www.neelc.org/
> 
> On 2019-07-13 12:47, teor wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On July 11, 2019 12:37:03 AM UTC, neel at neelc.org wrote:
>>> I'm really sorry about the delay in responding to your review. I was
>>> busy with an internship (unrelated to Tor, but still related to
>>> security) and was out a lot in my "free time".
>>> 
>>> I have implemented your requested changes and the GitHub PR is here:
>>> https://github.com/torproject/torspec/pull/87
>>> 
>>> Hopefully I have not missed anything.
>>> 
>>> Most of these changes you (Iain and Teor) suggested sound good. I'm 
>>> not
>>> 
>>> a huge fan of preferring IPv4 in the case of tunneled IPv6 
>>> connections
>>> (reason: we stay with IPv4 longer than we should), but understand why
>>> you have it (reason: better network performance) and have added this
>>> change anyways.
>> 
>> Thanks for these revisions.
>> 
>> I have some overall comments on the proposal:
>> 
>> 1. The proposal is very large now. Let's add an intro section that
>> splits the changes into:
>>   * initial feasability testing (for initial developer review)
>>   * minimum viable product (for testing in Tor Browser Alpha)
>>   * parameter tuning (for performance, load, and user experience)
>>   * relay statistics (for ongoing monitoring)
>>   * optional features, and how we will know if we need them (if users
>> experience particular bugs)
>> 
>> 2. Bridges can't be configured with an IPv4 and an IPv6 address in
>> tor, because tor only accepts one IP address per bridge. Let's be
>> clear that bridges are out of scope. (Tor already attempts to connect
>> to all? its configured bridges.)
>> 
>> 3. Each revision of this proposal has added text. Is there any text
>> that is redundant or not essential? Can we make it shorter?
>> 
>> After these revisions, I will do a final review. I hope we can get
>> another tor developer to also do a final review.
>> 
>> T
>> 
>> --
>> teor
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> tor-dev mailing list
>> tor-dev at lists.torproject.org
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
> _______________________________________________
> tor-dev mailing list
> tor-dev at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev