On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 02:01:20AM +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: > I guess you still have the alternative to drop SSL support entirely, > I guess that would annoy some users that expect the functionality, but > if there's enough good docs on how to implement binc+stunnel (or > whatever) they should still be fine..
I know I myself appreciate that Binc has SSL support, though. That way I don't have to bother setting up even more packages. Most other SSL-aware software have native support for it, though. Partly because of STARTTLS extensions to the actual protocol I guess.. //Peter
