On 2/9/2011 10:59 AM, Nilesh Vaghela wrote:
Hi,
I just realized that may be DTLSv1_get_timeout and handle timeout is
important because when server sends Server Hello we need to get back the
response in time out.
Is that right understanding ? If that is the case then in select I can
not mix other
Hello,
I have tested 1.0.0d release on OpenVMS and found many warnings during the
build with 64bits pointer size that produced many annoying warning messages
during linking against the library - like:
Building The BNTEST Test Program.
%ILINK-W-COMPWARN, compilation warnings
module:
Hi !
Re: OpenSSl 1.0.0d on Windows 7 with Visual Studio 2008
If I Configure with no-idea as follows...
perl Configure VC-WIN32 no-idea no-mdc2 no-rc5 no-asm -prefix=openssl
CALL ms\do_ms
nmake -f ms\ntdll.mak
nmake -f ms\ntdll.mak test
The ms\test.bat script fails with...
Ideatest
'ideatest
Hi,
I notice that when I download and build 0.9.8k it doesn't list
aes-ni engine support. However, the same openssl 0.9.8k which runs on
my Ubuntu shows aes-ni support.
What is different?
Also, from openssl patch history I see that crypto/engine/eng_aesni.c
was patched in a few months after
Hopefully there is a more portable way to do the assembler on ghash-x86.s
could you compile following snippet:
shor i=5;
generate assembler output with cc -S and submit it? a.
I'm guessing you mean short i=5;
Of course.
i:
.value 5
.value seems to be working on other platforms
Is there no interest in this patch?
Cipher-agnostic XTS implementation (featuring the cipher stealing part
and endian-specific optimizations) is being added. A.
__
OpenSSL Project
On Thu, 10 Feb 2011, Andy Polyakov wrote:
Hopefully there is a more portable way to do the assembler on ghash-x86.s
i:
.value 5
.value seems to be working on other platforms too. Therefore
http://cvs.openssl.org/chngview?cn=20378. Cheers. a.
We're making progress. The assembler no
Hello,
I'm running an client/server application over DTLS, which works great
locally, but when we started testing over the net, things got a little
wacky. It appears that there is an issue somewhere with
fragmentation/reassembly. I'm getting the above assertion with 0.9.8g
and 1.0.0e, both on
