You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In rustls/rustls#40 (comment), @lachlansneff expressed interest in an embeddable DTLS implementation, which I believe (together with #1) could work with smoltcp and friends.
However, rustls does not support no_std, while I think that both crates would need alloc nonetheless, no_std seems to not be a priority or possibility as of yet (see rustls/rustls#157, cc @gurry)
An alternative would be to be able to switch to different cryptographic backends, however, rustls is chosen as one because it can expose much of its innards, and I don't even know if using openssl's ciphersuites directly is possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think for this there should actually be a dedicated mode, maybe something that also reduces the amount of ciphers we support, and/or use ring directly, as it has some semblance of no_std support (see briansmith/ring#744)
In rustls/rustls#40 (comment), @lachlansneff expressed interest in an embeddable DTLS implementation, which I believe (together with #1) could work with smoltcp and friends.
However, rustls does not support no_std, while I think that both crates would need alloc nonetheless, no_std seems to not be a priority or possibility as of yet (see rustls/rustls#157, cc @gurry)
An alternative would be to be able to switch to different cryptographic backends, however, rustls is chosen as one because it can expose much of its innards, and I don't even know if using openssl's ciphersuites directly is possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: