ExternalVendorCode/tahoe-lafs
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/tahoe-lafs/tahoe-lafs.git synced 2025-04-27 06:20:25 +00:00
Code Issues Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

HTTP *per se* is not a requirement

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Jean-Paul Calderone 2018-05-22 08:42:55 -04:00
parent 5ede9662bb
commit bf305b91e4
1 changed files with 6 additions and 6 deletions

12
docs/proposed/http-storage-node-protocol.rst

@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
.. -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
HTTP Storage Node Protocol ("Great Black Swamp", "GBS")
=======================================================
Storage Node Protocol ("Great Black Swamp", "GBS")
==================================================
The target audience for this document is Tahoe-LAFS developers.
After reading this document,
@ -9,9 +9,9 @@ one should expect to understand how Tahoe-LAFS clients interact over the network
The primary goal of the introduction of this protocol is to simplify the task of implementing a Tahoe-LAFS storage server.
Specifically, it should be possible to implement a Tahoe-LAFS storage server without a Foolscap implementation
(substituting an HTTP server implementation).
The Tahoe-LAFS client will also need to change but it is not expected that it will be noticably simplified by this change.
(substituting a simpler GBS server implementation).
The Tahoe-LAFS client will also need to change but it is not expected that it will be noticably simplified by this change
(though this may be the first step towards simplifying it).
Requirements
------------
@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Security
Summary
!!!!!!!
An HTTP-based protocol should offer at minimum the security properties offered by the Foolscap-based protocol.
The storage node protocol should offer at minimum the security properties offered by the Foolscap-based protocol.
The Foolscap-based protocol offers:
* **Peer authentication** by way of checked x509 certificates