|
I should make it clear that I don't have a stake here. Lack of flow
control hasn't caused me problems personally, and I'm not
responsible for implementing and maintaining a TLS infrastructure.
This is purely an intellectual exercise for me. There were comments suggesting that, because TLS is an ordered-byte-stream protocol that needs control messages in both directions at all times, TLS couldn't support flow control. That seems clearly wrong; it clearly could. (As you say, we could just layer TCP on top of it.) Should it? My mild feeling is "yes", since it's already got a record and control message structure and so it wouldn't be necessary to invent another protocol on top of it. Yes, that makes TLS more complicated, but would it be any more complicated than an additional application-visible layer would be? It seems like the answer is that any complexity from a TLS-layer implementation would be primarily in the TLS implementation, whereas an additional layer would necessarily impose complexity on the application, over and above the complexity of the flow control implementation itself. -- Jordan Brown, Oracle Solaris |
-- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
