On Dec 21, 2004, at 1:03 PM, Sander Temme wrote:
On Dec 21, 2004, at 11:21 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Can we use a separate flag to specific protocol version?
To address both your and André's response, yes we can. I even found an
unused letter that makes sense: -m for 'method'. And yes, I'll
* Sander Temme wrote:
> This is the httpd-trunk version of the patch discussed under
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=11036567171&r=1&w=2). It adds a -m
> flag to ab that allows you to enforce the SSL version used by ab on the
> command line.
>
> I also updated the ab.xml
This is the httpd-trunk version of the patch discussed under
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=11036567171&r=1&w=2). It adds a -m
flag to ab that allows you to enforce the SSL version used by ab on the
command line.
I also updated the ab.xml documentation file, but how do
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 02:02:46PM -0800, Sander Temme wrote:
> We're also not talking about Ciphers here, just protocol versions. It
> figures out the ciphersuites for itself. I figure if we want to get
> that sophisticated, we'd better pour our energy into flood instead of
> ab.
>
Cipher was
On Dec 21, 2004, at 1:12 PM, Mads Toftum wrote:
Could this be similar to openssl s_client - ssl2, ssl3, ... and the
no_ssl2, no_ssl3 etc? Just like you might want to specify a specific
version, I could see where it would be nice to go the other way and
remove a specific cipher.
That's right, this i
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 01:03:13PM -0800, Sander Temme wrote:
>
> On Dec 21, 2004, at 11:21 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> >Can we use a separate flag to specific protocol version?
>
> To address both your and André's response, yes we can. I even found an
> unused letter that makes sense:
On Dec 21, 2004, at 11:21 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Can we use a separate flag to specific protocol version?
To address both your and André's response, yes we can. I even found an
unused letter that makes sense: -m for 'method'. And yes, I'll do a 2.1
patch. The reason my personal itch was
On Dec 21, 2004, at 2:15 PM, Sander Temme wrote:
The following patch (inline and attached) expands the experimental -s
flag to ab to specify the SSL version used for the benchmark run.
Valid versions are SSLv2, SSLv3, TLSv1 and ANY in which case the
program will use the highest version available
At 01:15 PM 12/21/2004, Sander Temme wrote:
>The following patch (inline and attached) expands the experimental -s flag to
>ab to specify the SSL version used for the benchmark run. Valid versions are
>SSLv2, SSLv3, TLSv1 and ANY in which case the program will use the highest
>version available.
* Sander Temme wrote:
> The following patch (inline and attached) expands the experimental -s
> flag to ab to specify the SSL version used for the benchmark run. Valid
> versions are SSLv2, SSLv3, TLSv1 and ANY in which case the program will
> use the highest version available. This code is active
The following patch (inline and attached) expands the experimental -s
flag to ab to specify the SSL version used for the benchmark run. Valid
versions are SSLv2, SSLv3, TLSv1 and ANY in which case the program will
use the highest version available. This code is active when httpd is
configured w
11 matches
Mail list logo
