From owner-freebsd-chat  Tue Dec 16 23:20:31 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id XAA17960
          for chat-outgoing; Tue, 16 Dec 1997 23:20:31 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from anlsun.ebr.anlw.anl.gov (anlsun.ebr.anlw.anl.gov [141.221.1.2])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA17952
          for <chat@freebsd.org>; Tue, 16 Dec 1997 23:20:24 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from cmott@srv.net)
Received: from darkstar.home (ras535.srv.net [205.180.127.35]) by anlsun.ebr.anlw.anl.gov (8.6.11/8.6.11) with SMTP id XAA03401; Tue, 16 Dec 1997 23:29:40 -0700
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 23:29:04 -0700 (MST)
From: Charles Mott <cmott@srv.net>
X-Sender: cmott@darkstar.home
To: Tom <tom@sdf.com>
cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Support for secure http protocols
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.971216210514.5409A-100000@misery.sdf.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971216232443.6411D-100000@darkstar.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

>   Suggestion?  Go SSL.  It is standard now.  It can be used for
> many protocols, as it can encapsulate nearly socket type date (stands for
> "secure sockets layer").

I'll look at the standard.  I'm no expert, but I can feel the weight of
logic and clear reasoning crashing against my ssh suggestion.  If somehow
SSL could be separated from end-use applications (maybe an ssld comparable
to inetd for processing and directing traffic) that would be nice.

Charles Mott