+RN_
+T3s|4
+acetone
+cims
+orignal
+postman
+qend-irc2p
Arch
Daddy_I2P
Danny
FreefallHeavens
Irc2PGuest293
Irc2PGuest42872
Irc2PGuest56290
Irc2PGuest69494
Irc2PGuest77921
Irc2PGuest93694
MatrixBot
NiceBoat_
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over1
R4SAS
Sisyphus
Sleepy
T3s|4_
U1F642
Zapek
aargh4
ac9f
ahiru_
anontor
b3t4f4c3__
calamares
dr4wd3
duanin2
eche|off
leopold
mahlay
makoto
marek
n2
nilbog
not_bob_afk2
o3d3
poriori
profetikla
quack_
r00tobo
rapidash
rednode
sahil
solidx66
stormycloud[m]
sublimia
test7363673
uop23ip
urist_
wodencafe2
x74a6
zelgomer
zzz
orignal
zzz, I have a question about database lookup
orignal
we have noticed in our code that every time we send lookup reply to specified tunnel we use one or our exploratory tunnels
orignal
was there a partcular reason for this or it's just a bug and we should drop reply to IBGW directly?
zzz
orignal, you're a ff, you get a lookup, you're asking if you send it back direct or via a expl. tunnel?
orignal
yes
orignal
any partcular reason why we send through explratory tunnel?
orignal
it seems that only reason was to reudce number of transports at a FF
zzz
that sounds right
orignal
can we reply to IBGW directly?
orignal
number of trsnaports is not loger an issue
zzz
you could do something like (if connected to the target || below connection limits) send direct; else send thru expl. tunnel;
orignal
since we got rid of ElGamal
orignal
thanks
orignal
I will change the code
orignal
it produces severe slowness of lookups
zzz
sure, we send direct, you're not anonymous, the guy that sent the lookup knows what router you are
zzz
sure, especially if you're already connected to the IBGW it's really bad to send it out a tunnel
orignal
zzz, DatabaseStore reply is always non encrypted
orignal
we should do something with it
orignal
as I understand there is only one case of non-encrytped DeliuveryStatus
zzz
you mean the DeliveryStatusMessage that you bundle in a garlic clove with the DatabaseStoreMessage?
zzz
^^ orignal
orignal
no
orignal
I send DatabaseStore and request reply
orignal
non zero reply token
orignal
then a FF sends a DeliveryStatus back
zzz
ok, looking at i2np spec, I see it
orignal
so, if IBGW sees DeliveryStatus
orignal
it means reply of a publication
zzz
I was thinking of the garlics going down client tunnels
zzz
ok, so what's the threat/attack?
orignal
IBGW can collect more information then if it was encrypted
orignal
for example if I'm IBGW I see my role now
zzz
sure but it's not much info
zzz
an IBGW knows it's an IBGW
orignal
most likely I'm part of a leaseset
orignal
no I don't mean this
orignal
if I receive a DeliveryStatus
orignal
I know that another end is part of LeaseSet
orignal
maybe encrypted
zzz
could be an expl tunnel
orignal
I mean published leaseset
orignal
how?
orignal
expl tunnel doesn't have a leaseset
orignal
and RI is published directly
zzz
we'll store RIs out expl tunnels and get a DSM back
zzz
we don't always
orignal
we also don't do it
orignal
only when we can't do it directly
orignal
that's even worse
zzz
the published vs. non-published is interestnig
orignal
published and encrypted leasesets