Why not option a) and just comment out the SSL directives in httpd.conf?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Barry, Richard
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 8:47 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Barry, Richard
> Subject: Pros/Cons for using Apache with mod_ssl for non-SSL operation
>
>
> This may sound a little strange at first, but I'm looking for
> feedback from
> the experienced modssl-users readership on how people view the use of
> Apache/mod_ssl in a non-SSL configuration.
>
> My purpose for asking is that we are porting Apache and mod_ssl and
> packaging it for our customers. Most of our larger target customers will
> configure and use it with SSL enabled, but many customers won't.
> We have two
> options:
>
> a) Produce a single image with SSL capability
> b) Produce two images - one with SSL and one without SSL
>
> With option (a) non-SSL customers will not enable SSL, but will
> still need a
> server certificate (otherwise, "unable to generate a temporary RSA key"
> errors prevent Apache from starting).
>
> We'll also be looking at performance impact with option (a) in
> non-SSL mode.
>
> Are there any opinions or experience out there on either approach?
>
>
> Rick Barry
> Apache/OpenVMS
> Compaq Computer Corporation
> Nashua, NH
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Apache Interface to OpenSSL (mod_ssl) www.modssl.org
> User Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
______________________________________________________________________
Apache Interface to OpenSSL (mod_ssl) www.modssl.org
User Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
