Bodo Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Using an explicit state machine helps to get code suitable for multiplexing >within a single thread various connections using non-blocking I/O.
Is there some specific advantage here, or is it an academic exercise? Some quirk of supporting certain types of hardware like nCipher boxes that do async crypto/scatter-gather? I have a vague idea from discussions with some OpenSSL-engine developers that they had some requirement for supporting async hardware in non-threaded environments, but from hearing the complaints about how hard this ended up being I had the impression that this was a major rewrite rather than something the state-machine implementation had been specifically designed for (sorry, I don't have that much technical info, the discussions tended to devolve into griping sessions about how hard async crypto hardware was to work with, not helped by comments like "That's because you're taking the path of most resistance, just use threads" :-). I also don't know if that explains why, years before this was an issue, everyone was already treating SSL as a state machine problem. Peter. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
