Elizabeth Myers added the comment: > Therefore, the most convenient place to add the new API are *transports*.
I had an inkling this was the case, but I didn't know how to go about the creation of a new protocol and transport pair. > I'm hesitant to add this API to Transport; it somehow feels wrong to put such > an implementation-specific thing there. E.g. I presume you can't do this for > an UDP transport. DTLS (basically TLS over any datagram-oriented protocol, including UDP, SCTP, etc.) exists, so this makes sense, although I don't know if asyncio supports it, but the only major protocol I can think of that uses DTLS is WebRTC. In any case, it could potentially make sense for other transport types, if not now, then in the future. ---------- nosy: +Elizacat _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23749> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
