Perry E. Metzger wrote:
2) I strongly hope that Netscape tries to move the product towards standards based mechanisms like the IETF's RTP protocol, which are in widespread use, rather than pushing yet more proprietary systems. Proprietary is bad in this instance.
Personally, I have some trouble with the work proprietary above. SSL 2 and SSL 3 protocols have been IETF drafts from the beginning. Discussion has been going on in a public forum since SSL 2 was first proposed. (Send a message to ssl-talk-request@netscape.com with "subscribe" in the Subject: to join the discussions. There is no trademark or copyright on the name. Netscape makes an SSL 2 implementation available with a no-cost license for non-commercial applications Other implementations done directly from the SSL 2 spec are also available. SSL 3 has been made available to the newly convened IETF Transport Level Security working group. If you want to be involved in the process send a message to ietf-tls-request@w3.com with "subscribe" in the Subject field. SSL does depend upon an underlying reliable bytestream. This means it is not the best choice for all applications. There are many for which it is more than adequate. PK -- Philip L. Karlton karlton@netscape.com Principal Curmudgeon http://home.netscape.com/people/karlton Netscape Communications They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin