On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 08:58:14AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 07:33:22AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 12:03:23AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > (added rjones from nbdkit fame -- hi there)
> >
> > [I'm happy t
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 07:33:22AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 12:03:23AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > (added rjones from nbdkit fame -- hi there)
>
> [I'm happy to implement whatever you come up with, but I've added
> Florian Weimer to CC who i
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 12:03:23AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> (added rjones from nbdkit fame -- hi there)
[I'm happy to implement whatever you come up with, but I've added
Florian Weimer to CC who is part of Red Hat's product security group]
> So I think the following would make
Hi all,
(added rjones from nbdkit fame -- hi there)
So I think the following would make sense to allow TLS in NBD.
This would extend the newstyle negotiation by adding two options (i.e.,
client requests), one server reply, and one server error as well as
extend one existing reply, in the followi
