[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Sat, 26 Feb 2000 22:43:26 +0200
On Sat, Feb 26, 2000 at 01:39:59PM +0530, Tarun Upadhyaya wrote:
> however, an init function should be used anyway as GNUTLS_STATE could be
> initialized to different values based on client's environment params,
> preferences for this session etc. (or will this be handled by the
> gnutls_init later down with other initializations?)
Well, i agree that gnutls_init should handle all these. So lets remove
> > [in case we support session resuming:
> > GNUTLS_SESSIONS *sessions=malloc(20*SIZEOF_SESSION);
> > /* keep a buffer of the last 20 sessions. A single session should
> > * have a timestamp, so it will expire in a few hours
> > *
> > * in case of client:
> > GNUTLS_SESSIONS *session=malloc(1*SIZEOF_SESSION);
> I am not very experienced but 20 sessions looks like an overkill to me
> in most cases. Can we replace that with a sorted list or something?
Well i do not think that it is really needed. The server may do
after every session:
in order to fit all sessions he needs.
We may also add the functions:
int gnutls_how_many_expired_sessions(GNUTLS_SESSIONS * sessions);
int gnutls_strip_expired_sessions(GNUTLS_SESSIONS* old_sessions,
which will copy old_sessions to new sessions removing the expired sessions.
so the user can:
We can however make gnutls_clear_expired_sessions() to automatically allocate
the space it needs, but i do not think that calling malloc() in a library
function is a good idea. If you have any other idea one these functions,
i'd like to hear... I do not like them:)
> Also, why should client keep only one session? I dont know but are there
> absolutely no circumstances when client would like to revert to a
> previously negotiated session?
This is one the client implementation side. It has nothing to do
with the library. The client can hold as many sessions as it likes.
> with warm regards