Rob, On 12 May 2011, at 16:38, Rob Withers wrote:
> It is a complete implementation with the bare minimum of supported > algorithms, based on the spec. It is 100% in Smalltalk. It worked last > time I tested in, several years ago. I will be able to tell you more this > weekend. Others have been adding fixes/small features since, but not a lot > - the base is pretty solid. I painstakingly followed the RFC for SSL - I > think I read it over 20 times! The only issue would be algorithm support. I > never benchmarked it, but seeing the difference in performance between > Smlltalk crypto code like 3DES and plugin code, there is a SIGNIFICANT > improvement (10x?). I do not know the state of Profiling under Pharo. If > someone could help set me up, then I will profile it this weekend. I imagine > both performance and certification were the reasons for SqueakSSL. > > There is also an SSH implementation I wrote that does dynamic window resizing > on net latency. It would be *very cool* if that code base could be ported to Pharo. It is really quite impressive that you did all this from the spec. I think that it would be possible to adjust my plan a bit, so that eventually, my code would use either the native plugin or your Smalltalk implementation. Then, we can compare features, functionality, bugs, etc.. Does that sound like a good idea ? Sven
