On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 03:04:47PM -0400, Hooman wrote:
> >Can you give us some guesses about next steps for resolving these issues
> >(or explaining why they aren't actually as worrisome as they appear)?
> >
> >A) It looks like the transport has no notion of adapting to network
> >conditions, i.e.
Ok, let's try to distill your comments down into some action items for
the proposal.
Thus spake Robert Ransom (rransom.8...@gmail.com):
> On 2012-03-26, Mike Perry wrote:
>> 3. Provide information about bridge sources to users
>>
>>BridgeFinder MUST provide complete information about how
On 3/27/12 12:09 PM, Robert Ransom wrote:
> It's not a typo. Those BridgeFinderHelpers MUST NOT be installed
> unless the user has explicitly permitted that they be installed. Even
> if the user has explicitly permitted that a BridgeFinderHelper be
> installed and write data to disk, it SHOULD NO
On 2012-03-26, Mike Perry wrote:
> Thus spake Robert Ransom (rransom.8...@gmail.com):
>> 3. Provide information about bridge sources to users
>>
>> BridgeFinder MUST provide complete information about how each
>> bridge was obtained (who provided the bridge data, where the
>> par
On 2012-03-23, Arturo Filastò wrote:
> Setting aside the issue related with usability there are also some
> interesting
> improvements that can be made to make Tor HS more performant.
>
> I will summarize here the ideas that have been brought forward along
> with some
> that are not detailed anywh
