Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of lists@glewis.com designates
 66.51.199.98 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4909EE56.6030102@glewis.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:26:46 -0700
From: "Gregg L. Smith" <lists@glewis.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: SNI in 2.2.x (Re: Time for 2.2.10?)
References: <1219322396.56534.ezmlm@httpd.apache.org>
 <48ADF087.2050502@iang.org> <48B0435F.2060606@velox.ch>
In-Reply-To: <48B0435F.2060606@velox.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Devs and fellow list lurkers,

I finally took the time to give this SNI business a try.
I compiled the latest branch for the SVN with Kasper's patch on Windoze. 
After a hurdle
with OpenSSL 098i that Tom Donovan was kind enough to help me jump over, 
I've got
2.2.11-dev with SNI working on Windows. Built with VC6.

I've seen no word on anyone testing this on Windows so I thought I would 
chime in.
I've been wanting this for longer than I can remember, 1.3.something. 
I've been following
this testy at times thread but have gotten lost. I've seen the latest 
follow-up thread but am
still uncertain as to any status at all.

Has it been committed to Trunk which paves the way for a "possible" 
backport?
Has any security implications (seem to remember one mentioned) been tamed?

I'm still uncertain about IE7, I see Yes for Vista and No for XP but 
I've seen that statement
contradicted. I (personally) have no problem forcing a visitor to use a 
compatible browser
short of forcing them to Vista, but I'm not selling wares on my website 
either which would
become more of a concern I imagine.

At least I have it now and am not afraid to diff/patch/diff/patch my way 
along till either 2.4
rolls out or it is finally backported into Branch.

Thanks Kasper for the patch
Thanks Tom for your help as always.
Thanks in advance to anyone that will nudge this ball further up the hill.

Gregg


Kaspar Brand wrote:
> That's the version I still consider suitable for check-in to trunk
> (attached again for convenience). A backport to 2.2.x is available at
>
> http://sni.velox.ch/httpd-2.2.x-sni.diff
>
> If, on the other hand, people think that SNI isn't important enough for
> 2.2.x, then I'd be glad to hear that as well (it doesn't make sense to
> repeatedly nag the list about that topic, I think).
>   
> Kaspar