Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 1, 2022. It is now read-only.

Enable SSU extended options for Session Request #16

Closed
anonimal opened this issue Nov 17, 2015 · 4 comments
Closed

Enable SSU extended options for Session Request #16

anonimal opened this issue Nov 17, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

@anonimal
Copy link
Collaborator

A proposal at this point. See http://zzz.i2p/topics/1987

@anonimal
Copy link
Collaborator Author

What's agreed to by all parties is to start using extended options, as documented since time began in the SSU spec (although noted as unused), as of 0.9.24. If you advertise 0.9.24 or higher in your RI, you may get sent extended options, and must (at a minimum) skip over them in the header.

Note: we currently skip but should consider implementing when .24/.25 roles around.

@anonplusplus
Copy link

anonplusplus commented Jul 17, 2018

I took a look at the SSU spec to try and help out with a potential review when it comes up. From my overview, it looks like only functionality change is to request that a relay tag not be sent from Bob -> Alice.

I also took a look at the java implementation to understand how they use the flag and if support with Kovri is needed sooner than later. It turns out, they just log the fact that the flag was set and don't do anything differently.

@anonimal
Copy link
Collaborator Author

2018-07-17 04:28:18     @anonimal       #187 can be pushed back. #16, if I finish #840 and #826 before wednesday, could possibly make it by wednesday. TBD. But we're in there anyway so may be easy.
2018-07-17 04:42:29     @anonimal       hmm, on 2nd thought, again, #16 is optional and we do skip over them
2018-07-17 22:26:46     anonplusplus_   [15:49:20] I'm not sure if the goal is to get the 0.1.0-alpha milestone to empty before the RC, but I took a look at #16 and it seems safe to punt it to a future milestone without any issues. The current implementation handles the case where it is set (with tests) and the java implementation just logs that the bits were set and their value.
2018-07-17 22:27:40     @anonimal       Why did anonplusplus literally just repeat what I had already said...

I'm not sure if the goal is to get the 0.1.0-alpha milestone to empty

We were having the discussion and you were there (I don't know why you don't ask more questions, you're welcome to ask questions in #kovri-dev). This issue is optional and known to be optional. Like the SSU rewrite/refactor, the issue is not knowing how to do it or what it entails: it's about prioritizing other issues and finding the time to resolve them.

@anonimal anonimal removed this from the 0.1.0-alpha milestone Jul 24, 2018
@anonimal
Copy link
Collaborator Author

anonimal commented Sep 7, 2018

NOTICE: THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN MOVED TO GitLab. Please continue the discussion there. See #1013 for details.

@anonimal anonimal closed this as completed Sep 7, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants