<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 13, 2008 5:21 PM, Noam Raphael <<a href="mailto:noamraph@gmail.com">noamraph@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
2008/2/13, Jean-Paul Calderone <<a href="mailto:exarkun@divmod.com">exarkun@divmod.com</a>>:<br><div class="Ih2E3d">> When you invented a new crypto protocol, the default is that you have<br>> lost. Sorry, that's just how it goes. I already see one weakness in<br>
> your code, as compared to SSL. I'm sure there are more. Google Gutmann<br>> sound wave therapy if you need further convincing.<br>><br>> Even if you don't use Twisted, use SSL.<br>><br></div>Well, you are probably right.<br>
Just wondering: can you tell me what's the weakness you found? (I<br>might learn some cryptology from this...)<br><br>Another, not really related, question: Do you know if someone used the<br>new coroutine-generators in python2.5 as a way to write servers? It<br>
seems to me like something that can make writing servers much easier,<br>since a function is much more natural than a state machine (that's the<br>reason I wrote this protocol without twisted).<br></blockquote><div><br>
Coroutine-generators? Python 2.5 doesn't have such a thing.<br><br></div></div>-- <br>\\\\\/\"/\\\\\\\\\\\<br>\\\\/ // //\/\\\\\\\<br>\\\/ \\// /\ \/\\\\<br>\\/ /\/ / /\/ /\ \\\<br>\/ / /\/ /\ /\\\ \\<br>/ /\\\ /\\\ \\\\\/\<br>
\/\\\\\/\\\\\/\\\\\\<br> d.p.s