directory authority/authorities need(s) updating?
Scott Bennett
bennett at cs.niu.edu
Sun Jan 27 19:52:19 UTC 2008
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 15:27:01 +0100 Andrew <tor at kleinhirn.org> wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>| Last night I reported here that the directory authorities are in
>| disagreement over client-versions and server-versions. Tonight they are
>| still in disagreement. The consensus documents still fail to list any
>| development branch versions later than 0.2.0.15-alpha as server-versions.
>| When will the directory authority operators correct these two
>problems?
>|
>The same notice shows up in my log after installing a fresh Tor
>0.2.0.18-alpha (r13293) around noon today.
The latest consensus file appears to have 0.2.0.18-alpha listed as
a recommended server version, but not 0.2.0.16-alpha or 0.2.0.17-alpha,
even though it still lists 0.2.0.11-alpha, 0.2.0.12-alpha, and
0.2.0.15-alpha. Also, the individual status documents are still in
considerable disagreement with each other. Are the directory authority
operators getting careless?
>By the way, if anyone cares: as of today, my node "cerebellum" is back
>up! Only as a relay for now, but better a fast relay than nothing, right?
>
Welcome back!
Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG
**********************************************************************
* Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
* "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good *
* objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments *
* -- a standing army." *
* -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 *
**********************************************************************
More information about the tor-talk
mailing list