Hi, I am involved in similar projects. I am trying to create patches aiming towards a more configurable library. With this I mean High granularity when it comes to beeing able to include/exclude what you need.
Best regards, Enrique On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 05:11:10PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi > > I'm currently involved in security projects that aim to embed in industrial > devices ( minimal hardware ) an ssl extension of implemented protocols. The > targeted footprint of the ssl library must be less than 80k bytes. ( > available memory on devices is < 300k ). > > Current available solutions are based on existing, proprietary and cost > expensive library. > > Another( preferred) way is to base our work on the current openssl > implementation and then to optimize it. But in this case, the main question > I have is : if we make such contribution to the openssl project, could we > expect that these enhancements will be integrated in the current project ? > > I'm convince that the needs of using secure protocols in an industrial > environment will grow up. So there is perhaps an opportunity to take in > account these new requirements in order to continue to promote the use of > openssl. > > > regards > > thierry > > > ================================================= > = Thierry CHICHE > = > = Project Manager > = Software and System department > = > = SCHNEIDER-ELECTRIC > = > = Research Center A2 > = 4, rue Volta > = 38050 Grenoble cedex 9 > = FRANCE > = > = phone: +33 (0)4 76 57 36 18 > = fax: +33 (0)4 76 57 98 60 > = e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ==================================================== > ______________________________________________________________________ > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org > Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
