I've been deliberating switching one of my projects over from protobufs/gRPC to capnp. My initial use case is mmaped struct-like data, which capnp excels at, but I would also like to be able to serve that same data to the wire, so I more or less want the full capnp-rpc package.
Unfortunately, I'm back to the same sticking point which has prevented me from using capnp in the past: TLS support. Has there been any movement on first-class TLS support in capnp-rpc implementations? It's really a showstopper for my use cases and I would like to avoid having to deal with bespoke TLS support in every language I want to make a client library for. I know that TLS hasn't been very amenable to capnp-style flows (and talked with Kenton about that a bit) but I think TLS 1.3 will address a lot of these problems with 0-RTT support, and until then TLS will just add additional roundtrips, something I'm fine with. Alternatively there's the Noise protocol, which may be a better fit for capnp's messaging semantics: http://noiseprotocol.org/ Either way, I need encryption 😉 -- Tony Arcieri -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cap'n Proto" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/capnproto.
