From 069898a4b8afd41ded0e482a5d0474cc2f6ca121 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nick Mathewson <nickm@torproject.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:30:34 +0000
Subject: [PATCH]  r15617@catbus:  nickm | 2007-10-09 22:30:22 -0400  Add small
 comments to a couple of proposals.

svn:r11827
---
 doc/spec/proposals/118-multiple-orports.txt    | 11 +++++++++++
 doc/spec/proposals/120-suicide-descriptors.txt |  8 ++++++++
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+)

diff --git a/doc/spec/proposals/118-multiple-orports.txt b/doc/spec/proposals/118-multiple-orports.txt
index 47bda85086..53dbb5885f 100644
--- a/doc/spec/proposals/118-multiple-orports.txt
+++ b/doc/spec/proposals/118-multiple-orports.txt
@@ -51,5 +51,16 @@ add in better ideas, etc.
     between them when they get extend cells to the same server on
     different ports.
 
+    - Suggested rule:
+      - If we're told to extend to IP:Port:ID, and we have a connection
+        to some server with ID, and we have confirmed that the server
+        likes the address we originally used when connecting to it (via
+        means in proposal 105), then use the existing connection.
+      - If we're told to extend to IP:Port:ID, and we have a descriptor
+        for the ID, and we have a connection to some server with ID,
+        and the existing connection is to an address listed as valid
+        in the descriptor, then use the existing connection.
+      - Otherwise, use a new connection.
+
   - How this all interacts with coderman's ipv6 stuff (proposal 117).
 
diff --git a/doc/spec/proposals/120-suicide-descriptors.txt b/doc/spec/proposals/120-suicide-descriptors.txt
index f0bc6921a4..b0b60720de 100644
--- a/doc/spec/proposals/120-suicide-descriptors.txt
+++ b/doc/spec/proposals/120-suicide-descriptors.txt
@@ -74,3 +74,11 @@ Acknowledgements:
 
   tup suggested this idea.
 
+Comments:
+
+  1) Don't name the official feature "suicide descriptors".  Suicide is
+     irreversible, and the concept pushes many people's buttons. How about
+     "shutdown descriptors"?
+  2) Maybe add a rule "Don't do this for hibernation if we expect to wake
+     up before the next consensus is published"?
+                                                      - NM 9 Oct 2007
\ No newline at end of file