Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id TAA27216; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 19:39:31 -0700 Received: from battra.telebase.com by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA27211; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 19:39:28 -0700 Received: from wormhole.telebase.com by battra.telebase.com id WAA02480 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 22:39:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mail@localhost) by wormhole.telebase.com (8.7.3/8.6.9.1) id WAA23641 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 22:39:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: wormhole.telebase.com: mail set sender to using -f Received: from spudboy.telebase.com(172.16.2.215) by wormhole.telebase.com via smap (V1.3) id sma023638; Fri Jun 7 22:39:14 1996 Received: (from chuck@localhost) by spudboy.telebase.com (8.6.12/8.6.9.1) id WAA08264 for new-httpd@hyperreal.com; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 22:39:14 -0400 From: Chuck Murcko Message-Id: <199606080239.WAA08264@telebase.com.> Subject: Re: crypto To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 22:39:13 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: from "Brian Behlendorf" at Jun 7, 96 06:13:21 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-new-httpd@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com Brian Behlendorf liltingly intones: > > On Fri, 7 Jun 1996 sameer@c2.org wrote: > > The Bernstein case, however, has some promise. > > Sounds like that would make a good acid test... > > We also talked about making the protocol layer abstracted, so that an SSL > 'module' could be worked on and exported completely separately. I > thought the buff.c work was in anticipation of that, but I could be > wrong... > Nope. That's exactly right. I'm hoping to start on an abstract protocol layer for mod_proxy after 1.1 is out. I'm hoping (as David suggested) that it will be a general purpose one. chuck Chuck Murcko N2K Inc. Wayne PA chuck@telebase.com And now, on a lighter note: "I used to think I was indecisive, but now I'm not so sure."