Hi Yawning. Thank you for providing these links. This is very helpful. I
will make sure that these issues are discussed at the next specification
meeting.
On Mar 28, 2017 8:36 AM, "Yawning Angel" wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 04:03:47 -0500
> Brandon Wiley wrote:
> > I am familiar with the dual
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 04:03:47 -0500
Brandon Wiley wrote:
> I am familiar with the dual stack problem generally, where servers
> have both IPv4 and IPv6 IP addresses. I was not involved in any
> conversations regarding the dual stack problem for Pluggable
> Transports specifically. If you could poin
Thank you for the feedback on the specification draft, Yawning. We will
take all of this feedback into account in the next draft.
Some specific points are addressed below.
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:27 AM, Yawning Angel
wrote:
> NB: I'm personally not doing any circumvention related work at all
NB: I'm personally not doing any circumvention related work at all and
I won't be the one implementing this regardless of what happens, so
feel free to disregard this.
On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 04:48:44 -0500
Brandon Wiley wrote:
> As was discussed in the Pluggable Transports session at TorDev
> Amster
As was discussed in the Pluggable Transports session at TorDev Amsterdam, the
Pluggable Transports 2.0, draft 1 specification [https://www.
pluggabletransports.info/spec/pt2draft1] was created by a committee of
censorship circumvention tool developers: Tor, Lantern, Psiphon, and
uProxy. It specifie
