httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm>
Subject Re: TLS/SNI status
Date Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:32:03 GMT
Gervase Markham wrote:

> Short version: I am hoping to find out what the problems are with the
> trunk version of TLS/SNI, how they can be fixed, and what the chances
> are of a backport to 2.2.

According to STATUS:

       +1: fuankg
       +0: like ssl upgrade of 2.2, perhaps this is a good reason to bring
           httpd-2.4 to completion?  vhost changes could be disruptive to
           third party module authors.
       -1: rpluem: jorton found some problems with the trunk version and 
they
                   should be fixed / discussed in trunk before we backport.
           pquerna: Until issues for this feature are fixed in trunk, we 
can not
                    backport it.

Can the various people above clarify exactly which issues are 
outstanding for the above?

Searching for jorton and SNI finds a whole lot of development 
discussion, but no concise description of issues outstanding.

For the benefit of people wanting to know what criteria there are for 
backporting patches to previous versions of httpd, binary ABI 
compatibility is crucial to make sure that third party modules will stay 
working when httpd is upgraded to a new point release.

If the changes involve amendments to data structures that render the ABI 
incompatible (and depending on the impact of the change, sometimes this 
is unavoidable), the backport cannot happen, and the feature will only 
be available in the next version of httpd, which is v2.4.

Efforts are underway to begin releasing alpha versions of what is to 
become httpd v2.4, so SNI support is not far away regardless.

Regards,
Graham
--

Mime
View raw message