diff options
author | Roger Dingledine <arma@torproject.org> | 2006-02-26 06:57:06 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Roger Dingledine <arma@torproject.org> | 2006-02-26 06:57:06 +0000 |
commit | 8614b958c6aeeabce506abaf228cdc337822bae1 (patch) | |
tree | 4ee9d3cc277362e03c45e5df28b6f4c44dbb5cc2 | |
parent | a3d1671f95440f610cd2553f3964f247a965546d (diff) | |
download | tor-8614b958c6aeeabce506abaf228cdc337822bae1.tar tor-8614b958c6aeeabce506abaf228cdc337822bae1.tar.gz |
initial tweaks and questions for the proposed udp spec
svn:r6081
-rw-r--r-- | doc/tor-spec-udp.txt | 29 |
1 files changed, 25 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/doc/tor-spec-udp.txt b/doc/tor-spec-udp.txt index 3a8863ec1..59d05342c 100644 --- a/doc/tor-spec-udp.txt +++ b/doc/tor-spec-udp.txt @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ Contents implementations MUST support the DTLS ciphersuite "[TODO]". DTLS connections are formed using the same protocol as TLS connections. - This occurs upon request, following at CREATE_UDP or CREATE_FAST_UDP cell, + This occurs upon request, following a CREATE_UDP or CREATE_FAST_UDP cell, as detailed in section 4.6. Once a paired TLS/DTLS connection is established, the two sides send cells @@ -119,10 +119,13 @@ Contents section 4.5. [Should the sequence number only appear in RELAY packets? The overhead is - small, and I'm hesitant to force more code paths on the implementor.] + small, and I'm hesitant to force more code paths on the implementor. -ML] + [There's already a separate relay header that has other material in it, + so it wouldn't be the end of the world to move it there if it's + appropriate. -RD] [Having separate commands for UDP circuits seems necessary, unless we can - assume a flag day event for a large number of tor nodes.] + assume a flag day event for a large number of tor nodes. -ML] 4. Circuit management @@ -131,6 +134,10 @@ Contents Keys are set up for UDP circuits in the same fashion as for TCP circuits. Each UDP circuit shares keys with its corresponding TCP circuit. + [If the keys are used for both TCP and UDP connections, how does it + work to mix sequence-number-less cells with sequenced-numbered cells -- + how do you know you have the encryption order right? -RD] + 4.3. Creating circuits UDP circuits are created as TCP circuits, using the *_UDP cells as @@ -157,12 +164,16 @@ Contents Use Kb as key; encrypt, using sequence number to synchronize ciphertext and keystream. Note that in counter mode, decrypt and encrypt are the same operation. + [Since the sequence number is only 2 bytes, what do you do when it + rolls over? -RD] Each stream encrypted by a Kf or Kb has a corresponding unique state, captured by a sequence number; the originator of each such stream chooses the initial sequence number randomly, and increments it only with RELAY cells. [This counts cells; unlike, say, TCP, tor uses fixed-size cells, so there's no need for counting bytes directly. Right? - ML] + [I believe this is true. You'll find out for sure when you try to + build it. ;) -RD] The OR then decides whether it recognizes the relay cell, by inspecting the payload as described in section 5.1 below. If the OR @@ -199,7 +210,7 @@ Contents UDP port [2 bytes] Onion skin [186 bytes] Identity fingerprint [20 bytes] - + The address field and ports denote the IPV4 address and ports of the next OR in the circuit. @@ -273,6 +284,9 @@ Contents set to the SHA-1 digest of the current RELAY cells' entire payload, with the digest field set to zero. Coupled with a randomly-chosen streamID, this provides per-cell integrity checking on UDP cells. + [If you drop malformed UDP relay cells but don't close the circuit, + then this 8 bytes of digest is not as strong as what we get in the + TCP-circuit side. Is this a problem? -RD] When the 'recognized' field of a RELAY cell is zero, and the digest is correct, the cell is considered "recognized" for the purposes of @@ -364,3 +378,10 @@ The items' formats are as follows: directory-related HTTP connections; and UDPPort is a port at which this OR accepts DTLS connections for UDP data. If any port is not supported, the value 0 is given instead of a port number. + +Other sections: + +What changes need to happen to each node's exit policy to support this? -RD + + + |