feat: reintroduce the tproxy functionality - #975
Merged
Conversation
This functionality has slightly changed since when we removed it in ooni/probe#2224. Nevertheless, in #969, we determined that something like the previous TProxy, with small changes, was required to support ooni/probe#2340.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We originally removed the TProxy in ooni/probe#2224. Nevertheless, in #969, we determined that something like the previous TProxy, with small changes, was required to support ooni/probe#2340. So, this pull request reintroduces a slightly-modified TProxy functionality that better adapts to the
--remote=REMOTEuse case.