mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <elecha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [MINA 3.0] Which filters should we keep ?
Date Sat, 09 Jan 2010 19:54:08 GMT
Alan D. Cabrera a écrit :
>
> On Jan 8, 2010, at 6:03 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
>
>> o SslFilter : I really think it shuld not be a filter, but a part of 
>> the network layer. You negociate SSL first, then you accept incoming 
>> messages.
>
> I know that I am interested in receiving events such as SSL handshake 
> started, completed, renegotiation, etc.  Why do you think that it 
> needs to be part of the network layer?
Being able to receive such notification is not related to the fact that 
the SSL handling is done in Filters. To me, SSL handshaking on NIO 
should have been a part of NIO, as it was a part of the standard IO API. 
I don't see the rational behind this choice, but I see no reason to 
inflict our users with such a problem like what they get if they put the 
SSLFilter at the wrong place in the chain.

Now, when it comes to the cases where you want to be informed about 
renegotiation, or simply that you are on a secured connection, I must 
say that I overlooked this point when I posted my other mail about the 
message I want to remove : the "SECURED" one. We can't remove this 
message from MINA 2.0, as it will negatively impact our users who has 
based their handlers or codec on the assomption that the very first 
received message will be this one.

For MINA 3.0, I think we should get rid of it. Either we implement a 
notification mechanism (à la Servlet), or - better IMHO - we can also 
add a new event like notificationReceived() for such a use case. 
Notification could cover all the SSL things, or any other we can think 
about.

>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.nextury.com


Mime
View raw message