- From: Blaine Cook <romeda@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 08:56:16 +0100
- To: Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
- Cc: public-fedsocweb@w3.org, Evan Prodromou <evan@status.net>
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 07:56:45 UTC
In the case of c2s (to borrow the xmpp nomenclature), we'd need to use something like client certs - dialback won't work. In that case, we'd want my proposed split, since otherwise we'll have two protocols. On Sep 7, 2012 7:01 AM, "Michiel de Jong" <michiel@unhosted.org> wrote: > Hi Blaine, > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Blaine Cook <romeda@gmail.com> wrote: > > "hosts negotiating a secure / shared channel. > > i would not make the assumption that the client is also a host. What > if the client is (honouring its name) client-side? Then the split you > propose would not be as useful, i think? > > or maybe i misunderstood what you're proposing, in that case sorry! > > Ciao, > Michiel >
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 07:56:45 UTC