update on Tahoe/Tor/Foolscap integration

[Daira Hopwood]

On 08/09/15 05:56, David Stainton wrote:
> Dear Paul Rabahy,
> 
> Thanks for running the public grid so users can test out Tahoe-LAFS...
> 
> Btw both you and Zooko misunderstood Brian Warner's e-mail; he doesn't
> want to take away the autodetect feature... he just wants it to not be
> the default if no listening address is specified... keyword AUTO will
> be used to specify autodetect... As Daira pointed out, this makes
> "tahoe create-note" slightly more difficult to use.
> 
> On the other hand these changes will make Tahoe-LAFS way easier to use
> with Tor and other transports (I2p, ipv6 etc) who wish to run storage
> nodes at home and need the transport's NAT penetration property.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm still confused about how changing
the default actually helps. The autodetect code still needs to be there
if AUTO is supported at all. No-one is proposing that nodes for which
Tor/I2P is actually enabled (or that have the anonymous flag set) should
advertise autodetected addresses, since that would defeat the point of
using Tor/I2P. So what is the purpose of changing the default when the
flag is not set and Tor/I2P is not used? It seems like that can only
potentially break people's working configurations, which I have a strong
aversion to unless it is absolutely necessary.

-- 
Daira Hopwood  ⚧Ⓐ

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/attachments/20150913/579d8dbf/attachment.pgp>