Jim Starkey wrote:

>I don't think it is necessary or even wise to use different remote
>modules to support different protocols. The protocol from the dawn of
>times starts with a protocol negotiation, which allows us to slip in a
>new wire protocol that new clients can use while still supporting old
>clients. Whether it makes more sense for line encryption to be
>implemented as a separate remote module or as a protocol option is a
>pragmatic decision. An SSL implementation, for instance, requires that
>the secure connection be created before communication starts, rather
>precluding protocol negotiation. A pure Firebird solution, on the other
>hand, could be implemented as an extension to the internal protocol set.
>
>Compression could easily be handled within the context of the existing
>remote layering and protocol negotiation. All that is needed is for
>somebody to put a zlib layer in the the TCP remote module. There are no
>significant issues at all.
>
>

Do you have any idea when these ideas could/might be implemented?
Specifically, over-the-wire compression, because I don't think
encryption is as urgent an issue (though it would be nice). But
compression is sorely needed, in order to make communication over a WAN
more acceptable.

Regards,
Jonathan Neve.