[tor-dev] IPv6 and v3 onion services

[David Goulet]

On 15 Dec (03:47:25), teor wrote:
> 
> > On 15 Dec 2017, at 03:29, David Goulet <dgoulet at torproject.org> wrote:
> > 
> > The place I'm thinking of is the EXTEND in IPv6 and relay self-testing in
> > IPv6. This seems a more critical point to build into the network before we can
> > start building HS support on top (single onion is different but will have to
> > do with HS code in some ways).
> 
> I'm working on this right now.
> It should be ready by mid-January, but it needs a proposal, so maybe it will
> end up in 0.3.4 instead.

Ok!

Can you tell me which ticket is that so I don't start poking at it? I think
without a nice layer of link specifier IPv6, we can't move forward on much
other things?

Let me know how I can be most useful here while you do that.

> 
> I would also like to make it easier to configure IPv6 relays. IPv6 support isn't
> as useful as it could be, because only 15% of relays support IPv6.
> Address autodetection would go a long way here.

Are you suggesting something like "Address auto" or "ORPort auto:<port>" kind
of thing that we enable by default for both v4 and v6 and then explicitly set
it if you want a specific address?

Auto detection of address becomes complicated with interfaces that have
multiple IPs... Which one do you choose?

But aren't you worried of Tor finding an IPv6 for a relay and starting using
it while the operator has no idea that it is happening? Dunno, maybe some
relays are bandwidth capped on v4 or/and v6 (would suck but)?

Anyway this can be a ticket (if not already done).

> 
> > Then, making sure a client can do IPv6 seems the natural next step. And then
> > we finish with HS.
> > 
> > So to summarize (in order of what I think we should do first):
> > 
> > 1. Relay
> > 2. Client
> > 3. HS/Single Onion
> > 
> > My two cents on this.
> 
> Seems good to me.
> I want to try and focus on getting minimum working code.
> Then we can add extra features later.

Agree++!

> 
> > Also, 033 freeze is arriving rather fast that is in theory mid-january so we
> > have to consider the fact that we might not get the whole thing in 033 but we
> > can certainly try :).
> 
> We can do parts in 0.3.3 and parts in 0.3.4.

Sure thing.

Cheers!
David

> 
> T

-- 
PQgdff5S0a51LrwYmq/+PRgWSz+jjvkgZTCn3plzEkY=
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-dev/attachments/20171214/7822a51b/attachment.sig>