Re: SSL and main
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> At 12:53 PM 9/27/00 -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> >Maybe I'm a little slow on the uptake but something just occurred to
> >me. Wasn't Sep. 20 the date the RSA patent expired? If so, let's start
> >the process of moving from non-us all the packages which are there simply
> >because of that patent.
> Hmmm, Could you list which packages in non-us
> 1) are there because of the RSA patent, but
> 2) aren't crypto-related?
I was specifically thinking of SSLized apps. I thought the reason that
they were in non-us is they require RSA to be legally used in the US.
> Or is crypto no longer a valid reason to have something in non-us instead
> of main?
That's a slightly different but overlapping issue. I thought encryption
upto a certain number of bits (40? 128?) was allowed now.
But I don't follow this stuff closely.
Jaldhar H. Vyas <firstname.lastname@example.org>