> But I wonder why we would
> handle CellType differently and not turn that into an enumeration, too.
Certainly could. I left the CellType alone (both leaving it as
lowercase and a string definition) because it's a sub-mapping and
hence we don't have any precedent for those. On reflection I agree
On 2/11/13 5:37 PM, Damian Johnson wrote:
>> Sure. Please find the revised proposal in branch proposal218 of my
>> public torspec repository:
>>
>> https://gitweb.torproject.org/user/karsten/torspec.git/shortlog/refs/heads/proposal218
>
> Hi Karsten. Looks good! Pushed some revisions to my propos
> Sure. Please find the revised proposal in branch proposal218 of my
> public torspec repository:
>
> https://gitweb.torproject.org/user/karsten/torspec.git/shortlog/refs/heads/proposal218
Hi Karsten. Looks good! Pushed some revisions to my proposal218 branch...
https://gitweb.torproject.org/use
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
[...]
> Sure. Please find the revised proposal in branch proposal218 of my
> public torspec repository:
>
> https://gitweb.torproject.org/user/karsten/torspec.git/shortlog/refs/heads/proposal218
>
Merged into torspec master.
__
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 3:35 PM, meejah wrote:
>
> I haven't looked at everything in proposal 218, but I would suggest
> maybe splitting the CELL_STATS into CELL_STATS_LOCAL and
> CELL_STATS_NETWORK:
>
> "650" SP "CELL_STATS_NETWORK" SP
> CircID SP ConnID SP Added SP Removed SP
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Andreas Krey wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 14:27:33 +, Damian Johnson wrote:
> ...
>> I cringe a bit to suggest it, but maybe a mapping in a mapping?
>>
>> CELL_STATS PCircID=8 PConnID=47110 PAdded=created:1,relay:1
>> PRemoved=created:1,relay:1
>
> You can as w
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Damian Johnson wrote:
>> I wonder if we should avoid restricting connection types in the spec by
>> defining this argument as connection type _string_ as opposed to an
>> enumeration.
>
> That depends on how volatile you think it'll be. If it's reasonably
> static
I haven't looked at everything in proposal 218, but I would suggest
maybe splitting the CELL_STATS into CELL_STATS_LOCAL and
CELL_STATS_NETWORK:
"650" SP "CELL_STATS_NETWORK" SP
CircID SP ConnID SP Added SP Removed SP Time CRLF
"650" SP "CELL_STATS_LOCAL" SP
