From a8db133857940b149765c9f1c1ebe75b3ffb9354 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Roger Dingledine Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 04:09:10 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] and dirservers are better for non-clique situations svn:r668 --- trunk/doc/tor-design.tex | 13 ++++++++----- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/trunk/doc/tor-design.tex b/trunk/doc/tor-design.tex index f5ea21b688..632ea92381 100644 --- a/trunk/doc/tor-design.tex +++ b/trunk/doc/tor-design.tex @@ -679,11 +679,14 @@ the shared directory is straightforward, and is described in the Tor specification \cite{tor-spec}. % we should, uh, add this to the spec. oh, and write it. -RD -Because the directories are signed, they can be cached at all the other -onion routers (or even elsewhere). Thus directory servers are not a -performance bottleneck when we have many users, and also they won't -aid traffic analysis by forcing clients to periodically announce their -existence to any central point. +Using directory servers rather than flooding approaches provides +simplicity and flexibility. For example, they don't complicate +the analysis when we start experimenting with non-clique network +topologies. And because the directories are signed, they can be cached at +all the other onion routers (or even elsewhere). Thus directory servers +are not a performance bottleneck when we have many users, and also they +won't aid traffic analysis by forcing clients to periodically announce +their existence to any central point. \Section{Rendezvous points: location privacy} \label{sec:rendezvous}