[tor-relays] ipv6 behaviour consensus

Charly Ghislain charlyghislain at gmail.com
Thu Apr 18 21:41:12 UTC 2019

Hi list,

Last reply from s7r on jake Visser' issue included a link to an open issue
waiting for a consensus on a mailing list:


Not sure if teor implied the dev mailing list or this one, but maybe
gathering feedback from operators is a good idea.

AFAIC, as avee stated on the ticket I don't find the current setup much
confusing. The documentation on ipv6 setup was not as clear as one would
expect, I came across what appeared to be outdated docs, and I think this
is the area that could be improved to eases operator setup.

I agree with Avee that any update on that matter should be backward
compatible, allowing relays running behind custom natted networks to
continue operating without any trouble.

I feel there is an issue in case the operator advertises an unreachable ip6
address in the config. This seems like a configuration error that should be
spotted by a self-reachability mechanism that is yet to come, like for
ipv4. I can imagine however that directories could be able to flag the
relay as reachable over ipv4 and not over ipv6, and that the relay would
still be usable over ip4. I thought it was the case actually.

Please provide your feedback. ip6 is around for so long, it is depressing
to see how hard it is for so many software to provide a nice user
experience with it.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20190419/d7454af5/attachment.html>

More information about the tor-relays mailing list