The patch is based on OpenSSL basically because I have used openssl in
the past and have come to know it a bit; I don't see any reason why
MatrixSSL (which I do not know) or libgnutls (which I know a little but
have had problems with in the past) could not be used. The EAP-TLS patch
uses an SSL TLSv1 context and not much more than that, so I can't think
of a reason why any other package which provides the same functionality
could not be used.
I will give libgnutls a shot over the next few days/weeks, and perhaps
MatrixSSL as well.
share and enjoy,
JJK
Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Jul 25, James Cameron <james.cameron@xxxxxx> wrote:
You've used OpenSSL, which has a license that is not altogether open,
specifically clause 6 which requires acknowledgement. Is there any
reason why you couldn't use MatrixSSL?
I would hate to see EAP-TLS depend on a niche license.
I do not think I would enable EAP-TLS in the Debian package in this case
since it would require pulling the MatrixSSL package in the base system.
If you do not like the advertisement clause in the OpenSSL license there
is libgnutls which is LGPL'ed and widely used (and has a sane API...).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ppp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
