Message-ID: <449284AB.5050700@route-add.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:15:07 +0200
From: Alessandro Selli <dhatarattha@route-add.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.8.0.2) Gecko/20060413 Fedora/1.0.1-1.fc5 SeaMonkey/1.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gopher@complete.org
Subject: [gopher] Re: RFC drafts
References: <E1FmQg4-0002H3-32@glockenspiel.complete.org>
In-Reply-To: <E1FmQg4-0002H3-32@glockenspiel.complete.org>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Errors-to: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: gopher@complete.org

Andrew Mahan wrote:
> or SSH-2?  Kinda like SFTP works

   My /etc/services file tells me sftp uses port 115 tcp/udp.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: gopher-bounce@complete.org [mailto:gopher-bounce@complete.org] On
> Behalf Of Alessandro Selli
> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 11:09 AM
> To: gopher@complete.org
> Subject: [gopher] Re: RFC drafts
>
> Benn Newman wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 11:21:01AM -0400, Trevor wrote:
>>
>>> this intrigues me.
>>>
>>> (sorry i don't look familiar. been lurking the last couple of years.)
>>>
>>> one downfall, i feel, with gopher is it is clear text. has anyone thought
>
>>> about, besides me, an sGopher protocol? i think gopher would get more 
>>> mainstream use if it had security built into it. many companies refuse to
>
>>> use anything that sends clear text over a wire. just a thought.
>>>     
>> Gopher over SSL/TLS (from my understanding) is easy and already possible.
>> You can use something like stunnel (on the server) and socat (on the
> client)
>>
>   I agree.  Only, you will have to use a non-standard port where the 
> SSL-gopher server
> will listen to, since there is no IANA-assigned "gophers" port like 
> there is a "https" port
> (443 tcp).
>
>

-- 
Alessandro Selli
Tel: 340.839.73.05
http://alessandro.route-add.net