Re: Gopher over TLS

It was thus said that the Great Mateusz Viste once stated:
> 
> I am not at all interested in gopher over TLS, I consider it as a 
> blasphemy. One of the things I like about gopher is its simplicity, 
> openness and transparency. But that's me. I can understand that other 
> people may have other things that make them "tick". That being said, if 
> *I* was interested in gopher-over-TLS, I'd consider two possible scenarios:
> 
> 1. using a DNS SRV record to tell "this host supports gopher-over-TLS on 
> port xxx"
> 
> 2. advertising TLS through CAPS. First, a gopher client fetches the CAPS 
> (over plain text), and then it may switch to TLS queries if it sees TLS 
> being okay'ed in CAPS.
> 
> Both of these solutions need no protocol change (incl. no change in 
> gophermaps).
> 
> In your blog post you do not address any of these two approaches. But 
> again - I don't care really, other than wishing not to be annoyed by 
> TLS-people abusing the standard.

  The reason I didn't mention then is that I didn't even think of those
solutions.  Just trying to find a definitive specification for the CAPS file
has been challenging (and I've not found one yet).  Both of these ideas are
much better than what's going on right now.

  -spc