From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/3202 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: High-priority library replacements? Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 08:28:17 -0400 Message-ID: <20130425122817.GM20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20130425041553.GA13951@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1366892906 29223 80.91.229.3 (25 Apr 2013 12:28:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:28:26 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-3206-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Apr 25 14:28:31 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UVLHq-0003eT-78 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:28:30 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 12196 invoked by uid 550); 25 Apr 2013 12:28:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 12188 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2013 12:28:29 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:3202 Archived-At: On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:21:12AM -0700, Hal Clark wrote: > I saw earlier that Cyassl was briefly mentioned. Now, in general I am > interested in your idea of a "minimal, simple API", but I've had great > experiences with Cyassl. IMO it is exactly what you're looking for. Minimal, simple API basically means I wouldn't want to see anything like the mess of OpenSSL's "BIO" layer. If I didn't care for making users of the library happy, I would say it should just have one function, an open function, that would hand over the socket to the library and give you a new socket (from socketpair) to use in its place as an unencrypted socket. But then everybody would whine about threads. So I think there need to be some additional interfaces, but not more than a few. > Could you comment on what parts of it are unsuitable for your intended > purposes? I'm curious what would need to be changed or replaced. So far, based on what I've seen/read, I find it rather suitable. Lots of people find the license (GPL) unacceptable however. Rich