[tor-dev] Is it time to drop support for the v1/v2 protos?

[Tom van der Woerdt]

Nick Mathewson schreef op 02/01/15 om 15:27:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Tom van der
> Woerdt <info at tvdw.eu> wrote:
>>
>> Sounds good!
>>
>> I spent some time writing a patch that removes v1 of the link protocol from
>> both the server and client, and so far it seems to work nicely: the code
>> compiles nicely, all test cases pass, and the resulting binary has relayed a
>> few gigabytes of data without any problems.
>>
>> As I didn't really have a place to put the branch, I uploaded it to Github:
>> https://github.com/TvdW/tor/commits/master
>>
>> It's a rather large patch, though not as large as the patch that will remove
>> v2 of the protocol. However, before I write that one, can someone please
>> check whether my patch is sane and I'm not violating any standards or
>> policies?
>
> Hi, Tom!
>
> Sorry about the delay; this has been a busy time, between CCC drama
> and the new year.
>
> A few procedural suggestions:
>
>    * Maybe call branches like this something other than "master"?  It's
> a good idea to have a separate topic branch for each patch series you
> write, so that the upstream project can merge them independently.
>
>    * It's a good idea to link to branches like this from the
> appropriate tickets on the bugtracker, so that we can't lose track of
> them.

Thanks, I'll create an account.

>
>    * Every Tuesday on the #tor-dev IRC channel on OFTC, at 1800 UTC,
> it's patch workshop time, where a bunch of people get together to
> review one another's patches.  Maybe you'd like to stop by? :)

Sounds fun!

>
> And, some fast notes on the patch itself:
>
>    * Actually, it's not that long. "git log -p -b" only says it's 607
> lines, which is comparatively easy to review.
>
>    * Some of the stuff can't actually get removed yet by the terms of
> what we've said we're doing.  The V2_CIPHER_LIST, for example, is used
> to detect Tor versions up through 0.2.3.17-beta.  We've only mentioned
> dropping support for 0.2.2 and earlier, right?. Similarly with the
> tor_tls_session_secret_cb logic.
>
>    Now, maybe we _should_ drop support for versions before
> 0.2.3.17-beta as well.  If so, we can rip out even more code.  (And
> that might be a good idea.) What do people on the list think?

I'd definitely like ripping out more legacy support code :-) According 
to the consensus, 0.2.3.24-rc is the lowest recommended version right 
now, and I (mis)interpreted that as the lowest version that must still 
be supported after I rip out code.

On a related note, I've uploaded a branch of the torspec [1] to reword 
(most of) the handshake part to match what I hope the code will do as 
soon as I'm done cleaning. Spec changes may need to go through proposals 
though, should I add it as one?

Also, in case anyone is wondering why a complete stranger is suddenly so 
interested in ripping parts out of Tor: I attempted to implement a Tor 
client and was constantly faced with legacy stuff in the spec. Might as 
well get rid of it if you don't need it - also makes my client 
implementation easier.

Tom

[1] https://github.com/TvdW/torspec/commits/remove-legacy-protocol-support

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3729 bytes
Desc: S/MIME-cryptografische ondertekening
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/attachments/20150102/dedf6fb3/attachment.bin>