Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 247: Alternate Path Lengths

2016-01-27 Thread Mike Perry
David Goulet: > On 21 Jan (10:28:16), Mike Perry wrote: > > George Kadianakis: > > > Mike Perry writes: > > > > > > > George Kadianakis: > > > >> Mike Perry writes: > > > >> > > > >> > George Kadianakis: > > > >> > > I have mixed feelings about this. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > - If client guard

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 247: Alternate Path Lengths

2016-01-22 Thread David Goulet
On 21 Jan (10:28:16), Mike Perry wrote: > George Kadianakis: > > Mike Perry writes: > > > > > George Kadianakis: > > >> Mike Perry writes: > > >> > > >> > George Kadianakis: > > >> > > I have mixed feelings about this. > > >> > > > > >> > > - If client guard discovery is the main reason we are

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 247: Alternate Path Lengths

2016-01-21 Thread Mike Perry
George Kadianakis: > Mike Perry writes: > > > George Kadianakis: > >> Mike Perry writes: > >> > >> > George Kadianakis: > >> > > I have mixed feelings about this. > >> > > > >> > > - If client guard discovery is the main reason we are doing this, > >> > > I think we should first look into the

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 247: Alternate Path Lengths

2016-01-21 Thread George Kadianakis
Mike Perry writes: > George Kadianakis: >> Mike Perry writes: >> >> > George Kadianakis: >> > > I have mixed feelings about this. >> > > >> > > - If client guard discovery is the main reason we are doing this, >> > > I think we should first look into these guard discovery vectors >> > > ind

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 247: Alternate Path Lengths

2016-01-21 Thread Mike Perry
George Kadianakis: > Mike Perry writes: > > > George Kadianakis: > > > I have mixed feelings about this. > > > > > > - If client guard discovery is the main reason we are doing this, > > > I think we should first look into these guard discovery vectors > > > individually and figure out how co

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 247: Alternate Path Lengths

2016-01-21 Thread George Kadianakis
Mike Perry writes: > George Kadianakis: > > Mike Perry writes: > > > > > > > > I have mixed feelings about this. > > > > - If client guard discovery is the main reason we are doing this, I think > > we > > should first look into these guard discovery vectors individually and > > figure > >

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 247: Alternate Path Lengths

2016-01-20 Thread Mike Perry
George Kadianakis: > Mike Perry writes: > > > While discussing proposal 247 with George yesterday, we realized that we > > still get security benefit from additional ephemeral hops beyond the > > vanguards themselves. > > > > Recall the high-level 247 path design is: > > > > C - L - M - S -- S

Re: [tor-dev] Proposal 247: Alternate Path Lengths

2016-01-20 Thread George Kadianakis
Mike Perry writes: > While discussing proposal 247 with George yesterday, we realized that we > still get security benefit from additional ephemeral hops beyond the > vanguards themselves. > > Recall the high-level 247 path design is: > > C - L - M - S -- S - M - L - H > > Where: > C = Client

[tor-dev] Proposal 247: Alternate Path Lengths

2016-01-20 Thread Mike Perry
While discussing proposal 247 with George yesterday, we realized that we still get security benefit from additional ephemeral hops beyond the vanguards themselves. Recall the high-level 247 path design is: C - L - M - S -- S - M - L - H Where: C = Client L = Long lived Layer1 guard M = M