Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Message-ID: <49CE81CA.6090708@apache.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:00:10 +0100
From: Ruediger Pluem <rpluem@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: SNI in 2.2.x (Re: Time for 2.2.10?)
References: <48AA6528.1090301@velox.ch>
In-Reply-To: <48AA6528.1090301@velox.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


On 08/19/2008 08:16 AM, Kaspar Brand wrote:
> Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>> At the moment we have 9 entries in the CHANGES file for 2.2.10 and
>> there are 5 more proposals in the STATUS file that are missing only
>> one vote. I think if get these done we also have enough stuff from
>> pure httpd point of view that warrants a release. WDYT?
> 
> May I use this occasion to ask if there's still a chance of getting a
> backport of SNI accepted for 2.2.x? Following suggestions from Joe, I
> went through all relevant SSL* config directives and posted my findings
> in two parts on 9th/18th June:
> 
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200806.mbox/%3c484CBAA6.7050702@velox.ch%3e
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200806.mbox/%3c48592955.2090303@velox.ch%3e
> 
> The patch I posted on 18 June introduced a regression, however, so I
> posted an updated version on 26th June:
> 
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200806.mbox/%3c4863C04C.2010502@velox.ch%3e
> 
> 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

I know that quite a lot of time has passed since, but as you may have noticed we
finally found some time to hack things up at the Hackathon this week in Amsterdam.
Nevertheless the patch mentioned in this mail seems to be still missing in trunk.
Going through the archive I noticed several attachments with the same basename and
and a version string attached. Are these patches cumulative so that I only need
to review the latest one?

Regards

R�diger