TLS already proves who each party is, so using dialback in combination would just be redundant (and less secure).
I hope you're not planning on using a cert-less TLS between servers. That would be a really bad precedent to set. -Justin On Thursday 20 November 2003 01:52 pm, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 09:53:52PM +0100, Matthias Wimmer wrote: > > Hi! > > > > If Dialback is implemented together with STARTTLS. What is the intended > > layering of these two protocols? > > Should dialback used first and TLS started afterwards or should TLS > > started first (should it be used for the dialback connection as well?)? > > > > Or is it forbidden to use STARTTLS together with dialback? > > I think dialback should be done first, then TLS. Applying dialback first > ensures that the domain names have been validated, and there is nothing > in the dialback negotiation that really requires channel encryption as > far as I can see. > > > HAM: DB1MW xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hmm, what about the HAM transport? ;-) > > /psa _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
