From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jun 26 02:20:42 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id CAA03978 for current-outgoing; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 02:20:42 -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 CAA03940 ; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 02:20:28 -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 LAA02946; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 11:20:12 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grumble.grondar.za (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA12300; Mon, 26 Jun 1995 11:20:11 +0200 Message-Id: <199506260920.LAA12300@grumble.grondar.za> X-Authentication-Warning: grumble.grondar.za: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol To: "Rodney W. Grimes" cc: phk@freefall.cdrom.com (Poul-Henning Kamp), mark@grondar.za, wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Crypt code summary(2). Date: Mon, 26 Jun 1995 11:20:11 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: current-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > I am going to counter Poul, and agree with Garrett, and give reasons > for doing so. ...and I am going to debate this too! > a) It is very likely to change as RFC's get done to cover this and > we will more or less be forced to rip out what ever we had done > to implement what is in the RFCs. The SSLeay code is already covered by RFC's. See rfc1421, rfc1422, rfc1423 and rfc1424. > b) This is cryto code and may have legal ramifications that none of > us have fully evaluated (and I wouldn't consider it fully evaluated > until some one has consulted with the State Department and/or an > attourny (didn't we have some one once offer us free or low cost > legal counsel??). Do US embassies have PR State Department folks I could ask? M -- Mark Murray 46 Harvey Rd, Claremont, Cape Town 7700, South Africa +27 21 61-3768 GMT+0200