On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:12:24PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
2014-04-16 15:04 GMT+02:00 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl>:
> I'll reconsider using SASL instead. I have the HTTPS-transport version
> almost ready, so for now I'll go with that, to have a working
> solution. There's still some other questions, mostly related to how
> the data should be stored on the receiver, so I want to get it out for
> people to test. The underlying transport is an implementation detail,
> mostly visible in the way that authentication is done, so a new
> transport can be added, and the old one deprecated or even removed.
After this first ships in a product, that's not how networks work;
protocols, once defined, are pretty much forever—or, well, until users'
setups are broken and users are unhappy.
It was an error on my part: I should have added a few big fat warnings
that this code (and protocol) is not yet ready for general consumption.
I'll add that now... I'd be pretty hard for anyone to use it so far, since
the client part is missing.