Hey Kevin, to get you updated on what we've discussed so far, you could try to build the diagrams from this repo:
https://github.com/infinity0/tor-notes/blob/master/pt-compose.rst The build-dependencies are short and listed in the Makefile. There is also a sketch at the bottom of #9744: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/9744#comment:3 For simplicity, we are only considering the case where, for a compsition chain of PT[0]..PT[n], every element except PT[n] makes one single outgoing stream to an address specified by the previous element. This excludes a chain that e.g. contains flashproxy in the middle. Our current preferred design would require minimal changes to the Tor PT spec. However, we haven't considered potential performance bottlenecks. X On 19/11/13 20:15, Kevin P Dyer wrote: > Hi George, > > Maybe I'm missing something from the discussions that happened eight > months ago at the dev meeting. (as per the initial comment in [1]) > However, I guess I'm a bit confused about the motivation. > > Just to be clear, the goal is to be able to combine multiple > transports easily, right? For example, we may want a transport that > has the DPI-resistance of obfsproxy, but the address diversity of > flashproxy. > > My main concern is that a general composition framework is going to > add uneeded complexity to the interface between Tor and the pluggable > transports. I understand the long-term benefits to being able to > compose pluggable transports, but my concern is that it won't work > well in practice, will be a nightmare to manage/deploy/develop, and > will have irreconcilable performance bottlenecks. > > I think pluggable transport composition will be a good topic to > discuss at the PT standup on Friday. To get my head around the current > design, it would be great if we could discuss a few use cases beyond > obfsproxy+flashproxy. > > -Kevin > > [1] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/7167 > > On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 3:43 AM, George Kadianakis <desnac...@riseup.net> > wrote: >> Hello Kevin, >> >> If you are interested in learning more about the transport combiner >> idea we were recently discussing, check out trac tickets #10061, #9744 >> and #7167. >> >> It would be awesome if you could comment with any ideas or criticisms >> you have. >> >> Cheers! > _______________________________________________ > tor-dev mailing list > tor-dev@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev > -- GPG: 4096R/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE git://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
