@eyedeekay
&zzz
+FreefallHeavens
+R4SAS
+RN
+ReturningNovice
+StormyCloud
+T3s|4
+acetone
+cims
+eche|off
+fa
+mareki2p
+nilbog
+orignal
+postman
+psychopuck
+qend-irc2p
+rednode
+snex
+wodencafe
Arch
Danny
Irc2PGuest28384
Irc2PGuest66257
Irc2PGuest75631
Irc2PGuest81267
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over
Sisyphus_
Sleepy
T3s|4_
U1F642
Watson
Zapek
aargh4
ahiru
ananas
anontor
calamares
dr4wd3
dr|z3d_
duanin2
i2potus
ice_juice
justaperson
luvme
mahlay
makoto
marek22k
n2_
not_bob_afk
onon_
pinotto
poriori
profetikla
r00tobo
rapidash
test7363673
uop23ip
w8rabbit
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