From f0ca834bc53d00464517b0fb22c1c92c675d5aaa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Roger Dingledine Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 06:00:14 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] notes towards a "How to choose the recommended versions" section svn:r14618 --- doc/contrib/authority-policy.txt | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/contrib/authority-policy.txt b/doc/contrib/authority-policy.txt index 760df707f2..18317a7022 100644 --- a/doc/contrib/authority-policy.txt +++ b/doc/contrib/authority-policy.txt @@ -43,3 +43,28 @@ us that you have. - Dirservers (and operators) in a variety of jurisdictions are best. +2. How to choose the recommended versions + + The policy, in a nutshell, is to not remove versions without a good + reason. So this means we should recommend all versions except: + + - Versions that no longer conform to the spec. That is, if they wouldn't + actually interact correctly with the current Tor network. + - Versions that have known security problems. + - Versions that have frequent crash or assert problems. + - Versions that harm the performance or stability of the current Tor + network or the anonymity of other users. For example, a version + that load balances wrong, or a version that hammers the authorities + too much. + + +> some use the slight variant of requiring a *good* reason. +> excellent reasons include "there's a security flaw" +> good reasons include "that crashes every time you start it. you would think ++tor is dumb if you tried to use that version and think of it as tor." +> good reasons include "those old clients do their load balancing wrong, and ++they're screwing up the whole network" +> reasons include "the old one is really slow, clients should prefer the new ++one" +> i try to draw the line at 'good reasons and above' +