Re: Start implementing GnuPG support...

[Brian Stafford <brian stafford office-logic com>]

Jose C. García Sogo wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 11:37:55AM +0100, Pawel Salek wrote:
> 

>> 2. GMime seems very promising but I haven't figured out possible
>> conflicts with libESTMP and/or camel which both seem quite appealing.
>> Can somebody tell us some details about these packages?
> 
> 
>   I don't know anything about libESTMP.

libESMTP is very new.

I think the following point is understood, but just in case....

PGP and S/MIME signing and encryption has no place in libESMTP since
one of its design goals is to remain orthogonal to MIME.

On the other hand, support for encryption of the underlying transport
does belong in libESMTP.  For example SASL provides for encryption of
data to be negotiated during authentication (the SMTP AUTH verb) or
the STARTTLS extension can be used to request TLS/SSL encryption of
the protocol session.

 >
 > About Camel, I see some issues: ...

I've had a look at camel recently but I haven't had te time to
examine it in the depth I would like.  It certainly looks like the
right sort of place to support MIME based signing and encryption.

[Aside: I note that its SMTP client is not as sophisticated as the one
in libESMTP, for example it would be difficult for it to support
PIPELINING.  I see nothing in Camel to preclude the use of libESMTP
to provide the SMTP transport object.]

Brian Stafford