Steve Holme <steve_ho...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> OTOH every half baked Windows user, and all power-users, >> knows that schannel is the 'thingy' to hack in the registry to >> modify SSL behavior. But I have no problem with calling it >> 'SSL-Windows-native'. > > Personally I find that quite offensive. I have been programming Windows > since v2.0 and have used SSPI on a number of occasions for Security Contexts > but not actually used SChannel. I might have read about it and glossed over > it but as a software engineer and power user I wasn't aware of its usage > fully until Marc's work.
Why do you take my comment as something personal? I really don't understand this. > I have stated time and time again that the literal should include SSPI > because, as I understand it, and please correct me if I am wrong and point > me to the MSDN documentation but SSPI is the interface to all the services > that it provides. Hey, I'm not saying SSPI isn't the outer interface. I'm saying that we can build a libcurl version wich uses SSPI and makes no use of schannel. You want a MS link which speaks about schannel without mentioning SSPI? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/245030 -- -=[Yang]=- ------------------------------------------------------------------- List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
