Re: [lwip-users] HTTPS support in lwip

[address@hidden]

Jan Menzel wrote:
>         At the end, the buffer size required for encrypting/decrypting
> transmitted/received data is something, that depends on your setup and
> on configuration options commonly available. So, if you carefully
> control and debug your setup you probably can run with less memory.

Jan, could you explain this a bit more detailed? How I see it, my memory 
problems was the per-connection allocation and there, the biggest chunks 
were the frame buffer for RX & TX (mbedTLS: *MBEDTLS_SSL_MAX_CONTENT_LEN 
*define). Now if you know the pages served (or at least the algorithm 
calling write), you know the required buffer for TX, but at least when 
providing file upload via HTTPS (e.g. firmware update), I'm not sure how 
the RX buffer could be reduced.

Unfortunately, the buffer size negotiation is not mandatory for web 
browsers.


Simon