> Not entirely true actually, if we do that, the old Stem won't be able to
> pickup the descriptor ID from new Tor... So how do you suggest to proceed with
> backward compat? Just a new field like "DESCRIPTOR_ID=" and we leave the
> "DescriptorID" in duplicating the information for v2 descriptors?
On 07 Nov (12:47:43), David Goulet wrote:
> On 07 Nov (09:40:36), Damian Johnson wrote:
> > > What do you propose exactly?
> >
> > Hi David. What I mean is that having an optional positional field...
> >
> > MyEvent Field1 Field2 [Field3] Key1=Value1
> >
> > ... means we cannot ever add more pos
Damian Johnson writes:
>> What do you propose exactly?
>
> Hi David. What I mean is that having an optional positional field...
I think the missing fact here is that there is *already* the
DescriptorID field and it's already optional (in the current
control-spec).
--
meejah
___
David Goulet writes:
> On 06 Nov (10:15:18), Damian Johnson wrote:
>> Hi David, great proposal! Sorry I'm juggling too many things right
>> now to really really review it. Quick skim though looks great. One
>> quick thought is that the HS_DESC event has an optional positional
>> argument (Descrip
David Goulet writes:
> Indeed.
>
> I'm unsure between
> "512 Syntax error in command argument"
>
> "552 Unrecognized entity"
> [A configuration key, a stream ID, circuit ID, event,
> mentioned in the command did not actually exist.]
>
> But overall yes!
It looks like the
On 07 Nov (09:40:36), Damian Johnson wrote:
> > What do you propose exactly?
>
> Hi David. What I mean is that having an optional positional field...
>
> MyEvent Field1 Field2 [Field3] Key1=Value1
>
> ... means we cannot ever add more positional fields in the future. For
> example...
>
> MyEven
> What do you propose exactly?
Hi David. What I mean is that having an optional positional field...
MyEvent Field1 Field2 [Field3] Key1=Value1
... means we cannot ever add more positional fields in the future. For
example...
MyEvent Field1 Field2 [Field3] [Field4] Key1=Value1
... would be ambi
On 06 Nov (15:44:26), AntiTree wrote:
> Hey David,
>
> Are there any ways of revoking a service's key and should it be included as
> a control port function? For example, in the case that the master key is
> kept offline but the host and its descriptor signing key are compromised,
> the box could
On 06 Nov (22:35:32), meejah wrote:
> David Goulet writes:
>
> Hi David,
>
> Overall looks good! A few comments inline:
>
> > "onions/{current,detached}"
> >No change. This command can support v3 hidden service without changes
> >returning v3 address(es).
>
> Does the cont
On 06 Nov (10:15:18), Damian Johnson wrote:
> Hi David, great proposal! Sorry I'm juggling too many things right now
> to really really review it. Quick skim though looks great. One quick
> thought is that the HS_DESC event has an optional positional argument
> (DescriptorID). This is fine *but* I'
10 matches
Mail list logo
