Update some more XXXXprop271 comments to refer to actual tickets or to be up-to-date

This commit is contained in:
Nick Mathewson 2017-02-09 10:48:28 -05:00
parent 3919f4f529
commit 14c2a1f403

View File

@ -1981,7 +1981,7 @@ entry_guards_note_guard_success(guard_selection_t *gs,
/* Fall through. */
case GUARD_CIRC_STATE_USABLE_IF_NO_BETTER_GUARD:
if (guard->is_primary) {
/* XXXX prop271 -- I don't actually like this logic. It seems to make
/* XXXX #20832 -- I don't actually like this logic. It seems to make
* us a little more susceptible to evil-ISP attacks. The mitigations
* I'm thinking of, however, aren't local to this point, so I'll leave
* it alone. */
@ -2950,7 +2950,7 @@ entry_guard_free(entry_guard_t *e)
int
entry_list_is_constrained(const or_options_t *options)
{
// XXXX prop271 look at the current selection.
// XXXX #21425 look at the current selection.
if (options->EntryNodes)
return 1;
if (options->UseBridges)
@ -2966,7 +2966,6 @@ num_bridges_usable(void)
{
int n_options = 0;
/* XXXX prop271 Is this quite right? */
tor_assert(get_options()->UseBridges);
guard_selection_t *gs = get_guard_selection_info();
tor_assert(gs->type == GS_TYPE_BRIDGE);
@ -3045,7 +3044,7 @@ entry_guards_parse_state(or_state_t *state, int set, char **msg)
if (r1 < 0) {
if (msg && *msg == NULL) {
*msg = tor_strdup("parsing error"); //xxxx prop271 should we try harder?
*msg = tor_strdup("parsing error")
}
return -1;
}
@ -3312,12 +3311,14 @@ remove_all_entry_guards_for_guard_selection(guard_selection_t *gs)
tor_free(old_name);
}
/** Remove all currently listed entry guards. So new ones will be chosen. */
/** Remove all currently listed entry guards, so new ones will be chosen.
*
* XXXX This function shouldn't exist -- it's meant to support the DROPGUARDS
* command, which is deprecated.
*/
void
remove_all_entry_guards(void)
{
// XXXX prop271 this function shouldn't exist, in the new order.
// This function shouldn't exist.
remove_all_entry_guards_for_guard_selection(get_guard_selection_info());
}