Re: Open Source Embedded SSL - (License and Memory)

2003-12-06 Thread Matthew Byng-Maddick
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 10:32:32PM -0500, Bill Tompkins wrote: I can't speak to how common it is, but there are applications that require crypto, and that require some sort of negotiation protocol, that don't use TCP or Ethernet. For example- wireless apps, or various non-ethernet multi-drop

RE: Open Source Embedded SSL - (License and Memory)

2003-12-05 Thread Peter Gutmann
J Harper [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 2) Make it functional on systems without memory allocation. Did I mention that I work on (very) small embedded systems? Having fixed spaces for variables is useful when you want something to run deterministically for a long time with no resets, and I have yet

RE: Open Source Embedded SSL - (License and Memory)

2003-11-29 Thread Bill Stewart
[Moderator's note: I'd really like to shut down the What license? debate --Perry] At 12:52 AM 11/27/2003 -0800, J Harper wrote: 1) Not GPL or LPGL, please. I'm a fan of the GPL for most things, but for embedded software, especially in the security domain, it's a killer. I'm supposed to allow

Re: Open Source Embedded SSL - (License and Memory)

2003-11-28 Thread Ian Grigg
J Harper wrote: 1) Not GPL or LPGL, please. I'm a fan of the GPL for most things, but for embedded software, especially in the security domain, it's a killer. I'm supposed to allow users to modify the software that runs on their secure token? And on a small platform where there

RE: Open Source Embedded SSL - (License and Memory)

2003-11-27 Thread J Harper
1) Not GPL or LPGL, please. I'm a fan of the GPL for most things, but for embedded software, especially in the security domain, it's a killer. I'm supposed to allow users to modify the software that runs on their secure token? And on a small platform where there won't be such things as