[Replying on tor-dev@, because I think tor-reports@ is not meant for
discussions.]
On 1/7/14 12:43 AM, Nicolas Vigier wrote:
> - continued to review current status of automation in tor project, and
> needs:
> https://people.torproject.org/~boklm/automation/tor-automation-review.html
>
> [...
> I'm not sure what you mean by "specialized DirPort method". Can you
> explain that in more detail?
No doubt I'm missing something basic about either the problem we're
trying to solve or how votes work. :P
What I meant by a "specialized DirPort method" was the methods in
section 4.2 ('/tor/stat
> Rationale: It is much more difficult to review patches that move and
> edit than patches which only move things.
I hate to +1 threads but I was thinking the same when this was first
proposed. I read all control-spec and dir-spec commits to determine if
they impact Stem. Making reformatting chang
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
> On 12/17/13 10:31 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> 177 Abstaining from votes on individual flags
>>
>> Here's my proposal for letting authorities have opinions about some
>> (flag,router) combinations without voting on whether _every
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:56 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
> [Re-sending, because my first attempt apparently got lost somewhere.
> Apologies if gets found and this is now a duplicate.]
>
>
> Hi devs, hi dir-spec.txt authors,
>
> when I reviewed the open proposals related to the directory protocol, I
On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 6:05 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
> On 12/17/13 10:31 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> 164 Reporting the status of server votes
>>
>> This proposal explains a way for authorities to provide a
>> slightly more verbose document that relay operators can use to
>> dia
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
> On 12/17/13 10:31 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> 147 Eliminate the need for v2 directories in generating v3 directories
>>
>> This proposal explains a way that we can phase out the
>> vestigial use of v2 directory documents in keep
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
> On 12/17/13 10:31 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> 185 Directory caches without DirPort
>>
>> The old HTTP directory port feature is no longer used by
>> clients and relays under most circumstances. The proposal
>> explains how
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Karsten Loesing
wrote:
> On 12/17/13 10:31 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> 212 Increase Acceptable Consensus Age
>>
>> This proposal suggests that we increase the maximum age of a
>> consensus that clients are willing to use when they can't
>> find a
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Karsten Loesing
wrote:
> On 12/17/13 10:31 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> 165 Easy migration for voting authority sets
>>
>> This is a design for how to change the set of authorities without
>> having a flag day where the authority operators all reconfigu
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
[...]
> Hi Nick,
>
> I'm probably missing something important here, but I don't know what.
>
> Right now, if a directory authority learns from the votes that more than
> 2/3 of authorities support a consensus method higher that it can suppor
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:56 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
> [Re-sending, because my first attempt apparently got lost somewhere.
> Apologies if gets found and this is now a duplicate.]
>
>
> Hi devs, hi dir-spec.txt authors,
[...]
> Would you accept patches making these changes?
I'm okay with re-or
On 1/5/14 7:13 PM, Damian Johnson wrote:
>> For example, status opinions (proposal 147)...
>
> Hi Karsten. Just looked at 147 to figure out the context for
> overhauling the dir-spec
Hi Damian,
proposal 147 was just one example. Another example is proposal 164
which suggests to add vote infos a
13 matches
Mail list logo
