I would like to know if somebody has already developed a TCP/IP 318 socket interface to SignServer,
as specified in RFC 3161, or, if not, how difficult may result to do that.
Thank You very much
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi,
We have not heard any interest at all in the socket based protocol. Everyone uses the standard http based protocol.
Why would you want to use that instead of HTTP (on port 318 if you like)?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
We use several application that make request of TS, and, in some case, they were developed
to interact with TS listening on TCP/IP 318 socket (as our actual TS does). However, in most case, the type of interface is modifiable to HTTP.
By the way, do you think HTTP is surely faster than socket ?
Any way, thank you very much.
E.
Last edit: Enrico Lacaria 2013-10-15
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
HI
I would like to know if somebody has already developed a TCP/IP 318 socket interface to SignServer,
as specified in RFC 3161, or, if not, how difficult may result to do that.
Thank You very much
Hi,
We have not heard any interest at all in the socket based protocol. Everyone uses the standard http based protocol.
Why would you want to use that instead of HTTP (on port 318 if you like)?
We use several application that make request of TS, and, in some case, they were developed
to interact with TS listening on TCP/IP 318 socket (as our actual TS does). However, in most case, the type of interface is modifiable to HTTP.
By the way, do you think HTTP is surely faster than socket ?
Any way, thank you very much.
E.
Last edit: Enrico Lacaria 2013-10-15
I think a mature HTTP server, such as Tomcat/JBoss, will always be more robust, more secure, and probably faster than a homegrown TCP listener.
HTTP is mighty fast in SignServer.
Cheers,
Tomas