Brecht Claerhout wrote:
>
> I am used to standard socket programming. So my first idea was to use the
> SSL_... API functions in combination with the socket interface. However in
> most examples I see the BIO used. Is there a (technical) reason why I
> should switch to BIO?
>
> My app. now works with the SSL_ calls, is it worth the effort to convert it
> to BIO calls? (e.g. future changes to OpenSSL)
>
The BIO stuff hides some of the low level socket operations and its
possible to write code that works with either an unencrypted normal
connection or an SSL one which only has different initial setup code.
Its also possible to write BIO SSL or socket code that works unmodified
on both Win32 and Unix.
However if you want to handle several connections in the same thread or
other things that normally need select() you'll have to use the lower
level stuff anyway.
There isn't all that much difference: the SSL BIOs call the SSL_*()
stuff internally anyway.
Steve.
--
Dr Stephen N. Henson. http://www.drh-consultancy.demon.co.uk/
Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior crypto engineer, Celo Communications: http://www.celocom.com/
Core developer of the OpenSSL project: http://www.openssl.org/
Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key: via homepage.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
