[tor-dev] Proposal 204 and next-gen HS addresses (was: Proposal status changes the last 17 months)
Nick Mathewson
nickm at torproject.org
Fri Nov 15 14:31:00 UTC 2013
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Lunar <lunar at torproject.org> wrote:
> Nick Mathewson:
>> 204 Subdomain support for Hidden Service addresses [FINISHED]
>>
>> This one allows an (ignored) foo at the front of
>> foo.bar.onion, for subdomain support. Sadly, I bet it will
>> never see much use with the introduction of longer onion
>> addresses in our next-gen hidden service design.
>
> Could you elaborate on that last statement?
>
> AFAIK, this feature has not been advertised at all yet because 0.2.4 is
> still unfortunately not stable.
Well, it's not *officially* stable, but it's sure the Tor I would
recommend to all my friends nowadays.
> The initial idea was to be able to support access through a single
> hidden service to mass-hosting platforms, think of all blogs at
> *.wordpress.com or *.noblogs.org. Why would the longer onion addresses
> be a problem in that regard?
So, suppose that I have a blogging platform running as a hidden
service. The base hostname might be something like
"cmktn5wni9uinp1niixoh8gzf2oqkcwckcexwe8zutfn5uu7zbb.onion".
Individual blogs might be at:
technology.cmktn5wni9uinp1niixoh8gzf2oqkcwckcexwe8zutfn5uu7zbb.onion,
lemurs.cmktn5wni9uinp1niixoh8gzf2oqkcwckcexwe8zutfn5uu7zbb.onion,
drama.cmktn5wni9uinp1niixoh8gzf2oqkcwckcexwe8zutfn5uu7zbb.onion
My thought had been that the long addresses are likely to make people
a bit disinclined to use even longer addresses. But I guess we'll
see; there's no reason to actually remove the feature.
--
Nick
More information about the tor-dev
mailing list