Delivery-Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 07:26:27 -0500
Return-Path: <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on moria.seul.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Original-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (eugeni.torproject.org [38.229.72.13])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D8C91E0413;
	Fri, 11 Mar 2016 07:26:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDBD939F2A;
	Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:26:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89ECE39EC9
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:26:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at 
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (eugeni.torproject.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id a70n71JOCauf for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:26:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from COL004-OMC4S11.hotmail.com (col004-omc4s11.hotmail.com
 [65.55.34.213])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46A5D39D29
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:26:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: delayed 312 seconds by postgrey-1.34 at eugeni;
 Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:26:18 UTC
Received: from NAM01-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([65.55.34.199])
 by COL004-OMC4S11.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft
 SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.23008); Fri, 11 Mar 2016 04:21:04 -0800
Received: from BY2NAM01FT030.eop-nam01.prod.protection.outlook.com
 (10.152.68.55) by BY2NAM01HT175.eop-nam01.prod.protection.outlook.com
 (10.152.68.255) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.434.11; Fri, 11 Mar
 2016 12:21:03 +0000
Received: from SN1PR16MB0430.namprd16.prod.outlook.com (10.152.68.58) by
 BY2NAM01FT030.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.69.205) with Microsoft SMTP
 Server (TLS) id 15.1.434.11 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:21:03
 +0000
Received: from SN1PR16MB0430.namprd16.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.222.141]) by
 SN1PR16MB0430.namprd16.prod.outlook.com ([10.163.222.141]) with mapi id
 15.01.0434.016; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:21:03 +0000
From: brent seguin <brentseguin1960@msn.com>
To: "tor-talk@lists.torproject.org" <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
Thread-Topic: [tor-talk] Why does parameter "StrictExitNodes" exist?
Thread-Index: AQHRex28h6L6sCcbMUm1BZeYOICYW59TXvGAgADLJQCAAACbGA==
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:21:03 +0000
Message-ID: <SN1PR16MB043039F2774449CB24D38BE6A7B50@SN1PR16MB0430.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
References: <786268.93027.bm@smtp140.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <CAAd2PDJ4p1GZUsYJF4Rsu6FR+SfetxnngRjxFvSdpkh7MKVDeg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160311001141.GL8732@moria.seul.org>,
 <ab5c2fd25b97504c2a0fd1cee72fa02e@openmailbox.org>
In-Reply-To: <ab5c2fd25b97504c2a0fd1cee72fa02e@openmailbox.org>
Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US
Content-Language: en-CA
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
authentication-results: spf=softfail (sender IP is 25.152.68.58)
 smtp.mailfrom=msn.com; lists.torproject.org; dkim=none (message not signed)
 header.d=none;lists.torproject.org; dmarc=fail action=none
 header.from=msn.com;
received-spf: SoftFail (protection.outlook.com: domain of transitioning
 msn.com discourages use of 25.152.68.58 as permitted sender)
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-tmn: [Pq+9YaaySYWoXzC5tAdlMyCLXrSL9MEi]
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:25.152.68.58; IPV:NLI; CTRY:GB; EFV:NLI;
 SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(98900003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1;
 SRVR:BY2NAM01HT175; H:SN1PR16MB0430.namprd16.prod.outlook.com; FPR:;
 SPF:SoftFail; MLV:ovrnspm; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; 
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d93a51d5-1bb1-4d65-eed7-08d349a79d08
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(5061506196)(5061507196);
 SRVR:BY2NAM01HT175; 
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(432015012)(82015046);
 SRVR:BY2NAM01HT175; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2NAM01HT175; 
x-forefront-prvs: 087894CD3C
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 11 Mar 2016 12:21:03.1096 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2NAM01HT175
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Mar 2016 12:21:04.0454 (UTC)
 FILETIME=[7B4BFE60:01D17B90]
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] Why does parameter "StrictExitNodes" exist?
X-BeenThere: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
List-Id: "all discussion about theory, design,
 and development of Onion Routing" <tor-talk.lists.torproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/>
List-Post: <mailto:tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

Sent by Outlook<http://taps.io/outlookmobile> for Android



On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:19 AM -0800, "blobby@openmailbox.org" <blobby@openmailbox.org<mailto:blobby@openmailbox.org>> wrote:

On 2016-03-11 00:11, Roger Dingledine wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 02:39:20PM -0800, Green Dream wrote:
>> By default (i.e., StrictNodes is false) Tor will bypass your declared
>> ExitNodes if it needs to do so in order for traffic to reach its
>> destination. Imagine the scenario where all the exit nodes in your
>> ExitNodes criteria have strict exit policy and they have no way to
>> route
>> your traffic to its destination. With StrictNodes set to True, Tor
>> won't
>> ever look for another exit, and this traffic won't be routable.
>>
>> Going from memory, don't quote me. ;-)
>
> No, this is wrong. StrictNodes has no effect on ExitNodes.
>
> This is maybe a better description than the previous one I tried:
> https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor.git/tree/ReleaseNotes?id=tor-0.2.2.32#n124
>
> --Roger

AIUI:

StrictNodes 1
ExitNodes {us}
ExitNodes BigSexyBanana

Yes?
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

