Dave Bakker

It's just as compatible with pre-existing software as adding an brand new socket option.

Thanks for reaching out! Even though it is not part of the official spec goals, it is very much a _personal_ goal of mine to facilitate domain name based firewalling....

> I'd also like to keep the door open for a dynamic network capability, though. I don't think the current proposal closes any of those doors :) The [Component Model](https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model/)...

I drafted up an interface at: https://github.com/WebAssembly/wasi-sockets/pull/104 I don't think a distinct `easy-client-tls` interface as mentioned above is needed anymore. Even "fully fledged" interface is pretty straight forward to set...

> The other important thing to notice about .NET's `SSLStream` is that it can wrap an arbitrary `Stream` implementation, e.g. a `MemoryStream`, a `FileStream`, a `SocketStream`, etc. So we need...

I did some exploratory investigation on how much of the .NET interface is theoretically supported by the draft. The results are now [included in the PR](https://github.com/badeend/wasi-sockets/blob/tls/TLS.md). Overall; not bad. What...

> I did some exploratory investigation on how much of the .NET interface is theoretically supported by the draft. The results are now [included in the PR](https://github.com/badeend/wasi-sockets/blob/tls/TLS.md). Overall; not bad....

I understand how the distinct `check_write` & `write` methods eliminate unnecessary cross-component copies. But it's still not clear to me what role `flush` plays here. Purely looking at the current...

> That's a different kind of "flush" :-). > POSIX write and thus Preview 1 fd_write expect that if we say that N bytes were written, that they were indeed...

Oh sorry, I wasn't trying to imply that sockets can't fail. But rather; the OS' non-blocking `send` implementation doesn't perform any IO itself. Most likely all it does is move...