httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)" <madhusudan_mathiha...@hp.com>
Subject RE: mod_tls
Date Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:33:37 GMT
Why ?..I see mod_ssl as a superset of mod_tls.. Both mod_tls and mod_ssl are
capable of SSL & TLS protocol comm., and they both use the same utility
(OpenSSL) for achieving it..
(AFAIK, mod_ssl goes a step further by being compatible with SSL-C).
 
The only reason why mod_tls has to be maintained (if at all) is because it's
a lot simple to understand and easier to manipulate.. 

Just my thoughts..
-Madhu

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Bloom [mailto:rbb@covalent.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 7:55 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org; Greg Ames
Subject: Re: mod_tls



At some point, the mod_ssl filters should be removed from mod_ssl, and put
into mod_tls.  That way, the same filters can be used for the proxy, and
other
protocols, without the mod_ssl wrapper stuff.

Ryan

On Thursday 23 August 2001 06:41, Greg Ames wrote:
> Cliff Woolley wrote:
> > I'm sure this has been discussed, but someone please remind me what was
> > decided.  Are we going to continue to maintain mod_tls?  I'm sure there
> > are some changes that have been made to mod_ssl that would need to be
> > ported over to mod_tls if we are.
>
> <disclaimer: definately not an expert on this stuff>
>
> I believe mod_tls is a layer that isolates mod_ssl from the filter chain
> in 2.0.  So we need both.  If someone wrote an alterative to mod_ssl,
> presumably that would use mod_tls as well.
>
> Greg

-- 

______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies			rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------

Mime
View raw message