On October 8, 2003 02:41 am, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
geoff Which reminds me, I'm not sure yet about my last post's
geoff comments on this sslv3/tlsv1 methods can't internegotiate
geoff stuff - I'm less sure now of what I was seeing than I was when
geoff I was seeing it.
In the
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 8 Oct 2003 00:30:34 -0400, Geoff Thorpe [EMAIL
PROTECTED] said:
geoff Which reminds me, I'm not sure yet about my last post's
geoff comments on this sslv3/tlsv1 methods can't internegotiate
geoff stuff - I'm less sure now of what I was seeing than I was when
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 7 Oct 2003 19:16:59 +0200, Dr. Stephen
Henson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
steve On Tue, Oct 07, 2003, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
steve
steve As has been seen in my last few commits, I
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:25:52 +0200, Dr. Stephen Henson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
steve I was thinking that there should be a way to represent
steve supported compression methods in the v2 client hello. For
steve example RFC2246 appendix E again has a general way of
Hi,
On October 8, 2003 07:25 am, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
Ah, I'm itcing on a different thing then :-)
I was thinking that there should be a way to represent supported
compression methods in the v2 client hello. For example RFC2246
appendix E again has a general way of representing a V3
Hi,
On October 7, 2003 03:58 am, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
As has been seen in my last few commits, I got a bit obsessed with
compression. The way it works now, at least in 0.9.8-dev, is
compliant with draft-ietf-tls-compression-05.txt, as far as I can
tell.
Cool.
The only
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
As has been seen in my last few commits, I got a bit obsessed with
compression. The way it works now, at least in 0.9.8-dev, is
compliant with draft-ietf-tls-compression-05.txt, as far as I can
tell.
Interesting. Is it still
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 7 Oct 2003 19:16:59 +0200, Dr. Stephen Henson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
steve On Tue, Oct 07, 2003, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
steve
steve As has been seen in my last few commits, I got a bit obsessed with
steve compression. The way it works now,
Hi there,
On October 7, 2003 10:28 pm, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
I think that part is already answered by the following, taken from
appendix E in RFC 2246:
TLS version 1.0 and SSL 3.0 are very similar; thus, supporting both
is easy. TLS clients who wish to negotiate with SSL
