@eyedeekay
&eche|on
&zzz
+FreefallHeavens
+R4SAS
+RN_
+Romster
+T3s|4
+acetone
+cims
+eche|off
+hagen
+mareki2p
+mesh
+nilbog
+nyaa2pguy
+orignal
+postman
+qend-irc2p
+red
+snex
+wodencafe
Arch
Danny
Holmes
Irc2PGuest28384
Irc2PGuest84270
Irc2PGuest92627
NiceBoat_
OfficialCIA_
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over1
SilentWave
Sleepy
T3s|4_
U1F642
Wikk_0
Zapek
aargh4
ac9f
ahiru
anontor
dr4wd3
duanin2
eyedeekay_
eyedeekay_bnc
ice_juice
leopold
mahlay
makoto
n2
not_bob_afk2
poriori
profetikla
r00tobo
rapidash
test3847473
thetia
uop23ip
urist_
utp
vivid_reader56
x74a6
zelgomer
zzz
welcome cims how may we help you?
cims
Thanks for voice
cims
Is it normal for a lease set lookup through a client tunnel to have a response from an exploratory tunnel?
cims
I'm having the same issue some other users have (have difficulty connecting to eepsites with ElGamal disabled client tunnels), and found this behavior when debugging.
cims
This behavior doesn't exist when ElGamal is enabled (ECIES+ElGamal)
cims
My router runs in hidden mode btw, if that matters
zzz
yeah it can happen
cims
Then how does encryption type trigger different behaviors? It doesn't make sense to me.
zzz
The applicable routing logic is, I believe, in IterativeSearchJob
zzz
so your two test cases are ECIES-only and ECIES+ElGamal, right? No PQ involved?
cims
PQ+ECIES have the same behavior as ECIES only
zzz
the reply should only come back thru expl if you don't have IB client tunnels, but even then it should end up in the right place
cims
Something might be broken :(
zzz
try logging IterativeSearchJob to see whats going on
cims
Oh
cims
How do we decide which IB tunnel to use?
cims
Maybe I could look into that part