>> I hope to test some clearnet 2 hop VPN service with double >> encryption to feel that part.
> I thin that also one-hop works Since Tor would not be of benefit there, I must assume there is confusion and ask people to... please get the definitions right: HOP = An action you take, a river you must leap, the distance between two nodes. ZERO hops = no motion. degenerate, no packets can move. ONE hop = no nodes between you and the destination. TWO hops = one node between... N hops = (N-1) nodes between... I also showed defined 2 and 4 hop pictures in a previous post. > and that in general Tor is too restricted given it's threat model. > Generally my feeling is that Tor should "evolve" into something more > flexible within the balance of performance vs anonymity. Yes. I don't mind restrictive options, even by default for the masses that use it. So long as the same binary may also be configured to do any other useful/custom things that may come up under the Tor model... node directories, node selection, onion encryption, circuit management, isolation models, etc. Tor is still young. There will be a day when you can open a port on Tor and have traffic sent to that port travel some fixed path or a dynamic path governed by certain parameters... independant of how any other port operates :) _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
