From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jun 26 11:21:42 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id LAA26531 for current-outgoing; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 11:21:42 -0700 Received: from grunt.grondar.za (grunt.grondar.za [196.7.18.129]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id LAA26524 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 11:21:22 -0700 Received: from grumble.grondar.za (grumble.grondar.za [196.7.18.130]) by grunt.grondar.za (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id UAA03521; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 20:20:33 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grumble.grondar.za (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA13634; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 20:20:32 +0200 Message-Id: <199506261820.UAA13634@grumble.grondar.za> X-Authentication-Warning: grumble.grondar.za: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol To: Garrett Wollman cc: ache@astral.msk.su, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Crypt code summary(2). Date: Mon, 26 Jun 1995 20:20:31 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: current-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > > 1) SSLref SSL implementation (Netscape) > > uses RSAREF, you don't need PKP license for it. > > Which I would be STRONGLY opposed to having in the source tree. Why? You have voiced an opinion for another package (I cannot remember its name). Lets hear some argument for this. I would like _something_. > It's not RSAREF, therefore we can't distribute it in the US without a > license. (Unless distributors want to get sued; I don't.) > > > 3) Outside USA exists RSAEURO, which is compatible > > with RSAREF and made in Europe. > > It's not RSAREF, therefore we can't distribute it in the US without a > license. (Unless distributors want to get sued; I don't.) You are missing a point here. What is wrong (apart from your reservations above) of distributing RSAREF in the USA and RSAEURO elsewhere? > I don't seem to be getting through here. We have an elaborate > mechanism for dealing with this sort of problem in the ports > collection. The base source tree is too big as it is. You're > proposing to bloat it even further to include something which belongs > in ports if anywhere at all. There is a tacit agreement that some form of secure-secure-type mechanism should be in the tree. I (and a couple of others) believe this (SSLeay) is it. M -- Mark Murray 46 Harvey Rd, Claremont, Cape Town 7700, South Africa +27 21 61-3768 GMT+0200