Issue 14034012: Support upgrading sockets to secure sockets

Issue 14034012: Support upgrading sockets to secure sockets (Closed)

Created:
7 years, 8 months ago by Søren Gjesse

Modified:
7 years, 8 months ago

Reviewers:
Anders Johnsen

CC:
reviews_dartlang.org

Base URL:
https://dart.googlecode.com/svn/branches/bleeding_edge/dart

Visibility:
Public.

More Reviews

Description

Support upgrading sockets to secure sockets This build on the support for upgrading raw sockets to raw secure sockets. R=ajohnsen@google.com BUG=https://code.google.com/p/dart/issues/detail?id=8789 Committed: https://code.google.com/p/dart/source/detail?r=21859

Patch Set 1 #

Total comments: 2

Created: 7 years, 8 months ago

Download [raw] [tar.bz2]

	Unified diffs	Side-by-side diffs	Stats (+308 lines, -3 lines)			Patch
M	runtime/bin/socket_patch.dart	View	3 chunks	+19 lines, -3 lines	0 comments	Download
M	sdk/lib/io/secure_socket.dart	View	1 chunk	+79 lines, -0 lines	2 comments	Download
A	tests/standalone/io/socket_upgrade_to_secure_test.dart	View	1 chunk	+210 lines, -0 lines	0 comments	Download

Messages

Total messages: 4 (0 generated)

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages

Anders Johnsen

LGTM, cool stuff! :) https://codereview.chromium.org/14034012/diff/1/sdk/lib/io/secure_socket.dart File sdk/lib/io/secure_socket.dart (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/14034012/diff/1/sdk/lib/io/secure_socket.dart#newcode107 sdk/lib/io/secure_socket.dart:107: static Future<SecureSocket> secureServer( secureServer can ...

7 years, 8 months ago (2013-04-22 14:08:17 UTC) #2

Søren Gjesse

Committed patchset #1 manually as r21859 (presubmit successful).

7 years, 8 months ago (2013-04-23 06:51:07 UTC) #3

Søren Gjesse

7 years, 8 months ago (2013-04-23 06:51:21 UTC) #4

Message was sent while issue was closed.

https://codereview.chromium.org/14034012/diff/1/sdk/lib/io/secure_socket.dart
File sdk/lib/io/secure_socket.dart (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/14034012/diff/1/sdk/lib/io/secure_socket.dart...
sdk/lib/io/secure_socket.dart:107: static Future<SecureSocket> secureServer(
On 2013/04/22 14:08:17, Anders Johnsen wrote:
> secureServer can be a bit ambivalent. What about moving it into one, and make
it
> a named argument?

The problem with this is that for the server end the certificateName is not
optional. Also for the server end there is an optional carryOverData which is
not on the client end.

Combining the two would require explaining when to use which optional arguments.

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages