Re: problems running on solaris 2.6(URGENT)

1999-12-10 Thread Mark Dedlow
> On Thu, Dec 09, 1999, Scott R. Every wrote: > > > we are trying to switch one of our new servers to mod_ssl from stronghold > > on solaris 2.6. using a similar setup to what works on our linux machine, > > get the following error at runtime: > > /usr/local/apache/bin/apachectl startssl > > Ou

Re: Problem compiling Apache with mod_ssl

1999-08-15 Thread Mark Dedlow
Ofer Inbar wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 1999 at 12:00:24PM -0400, I wrote: > > I'm trying to build Apache 1.3.6 mod_perl and mod_ssl using openssl on > > a Solaris box. The relevant version numbers are: > > > > Solaris 2.6 > > Apache 1.3.6 > > mod_perl 1.19 > > mod_ssl 2.3.11 > > openssl 0.9.4 > >

Re: mod_ssl for apachw 1.2.6?

1999-08-04 Thread Mark Dedlow
well distributed across the CPU's. What caused the dropouts was never > discovered, but it made it very hard to guage the previous performance > accurately. By looking at the best response times, we still had a > performance gain, but more in the magnatiude of 50%. > > Jeff > &

Re: mod_ssl for apachw 1.2.6?

1999-08-04 Thread Mark Dedlow
Victor Khimenko wrote: > If you need SSL speed is not issue anymore. SSL is VERY processor-intensive > so you'll got at most 10-20 connections per second. Additional timeout from > ping-pong between 1.2.6 and 1.3.6 will be dwarfed by SSL timeout on any > decent OS... However, last week someone

Re: mutex ipc semaphore

1999-07-29 Thread Mark Dedlow
> From the user manual under "SSLMutex": > (http://www.modssl.org/docs/2.3/ssl_reference.html) > > o sem > > This is the most elegant but also most non-portable Mutex variant > where a SysV IPC Semaphore (under Unix) and a Windows Mutex (under > Win32) is used when possible. It is only a

Re: Too Many Virtual Domains??

1999-07-14 Thread Mark Dedlow
> Most unix systems (including Linux) have a limit on the number of open > file handles. If each of your virtual domains logs site statistics to a > separate file then you will be limited to the number of virtual hosts you > can have. I think Linux is limited to 24 file handles. Check and see > w

Re: SSL handshake interrupted by system

1999-02-07 Thread Mark Dedlow
> On Sat, Feb 06, 1999, Mark Dedlow wrote: > > > Can someone tell me what exactly this means? > > httpd: [error] mod_ssl: SSL handshake interrupted by system > > > > I see no pattern to its occurence, except it > > is always Netscape that I'm using.

SSL handshake interrupted by system

1999-02-07 Thread Mark Dedlow
Can someone tell me what exactly this means? httpd: [error] mod_ssl: SSL handshake interrupted by system I see no pattern to its occurence, except it is always Netscape that I'm using. It never happens with MSIE. Thanks, Mark ___

Re: NS 4.5 can't connect to default https:/host/ with modssl

1999-01-21 Thread Mark Dedlow
> On Mon, Jan 18, 1999, Mark Dedlow wrote: > > > I've been running mod_ssl-2.1.0-1.3.3 for months without > > a problem and using my own Auth handler ona high port. Now > > I'm trying to run it in on port 443, and if I connect > > via https:/host:443/

Re: NS 4.5 can't connect to default https:/host/ with modssl

1999-01-19 Thread Mark Dedlow
Ralf, > On Mon, Jan 18, 1999, Mark Dedlow wrote: > > > I've been running mod_ssl-2.1.0-1.3.3 for months without > > a problem and using my own Auth handler ona high port. Now > > I'm trying to run it in on port 443, and if I connect > > via https:/

NS 4.5 can't connect to default https:/host/ with modssl

1999-01-19 Thread Mark Dedlow
Hi, I've been running mod_ssl-2.1.0-1.3.3 for months without a problem and using my own Auth handler ona high port. Now I'm trying to run it in on port 443, and if I connect via https:/host:443/ it works fine, but https:/host/ (no explicit port), NS 4.5 goes into a endless loop requesting the p

Re: bind: Address already in use

1998-10-07 Thread Mark Dedlow
> > In article <> you wrote: > > >> At 13:39 1998-10-06 -0500, Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > >> >apachectl startssl > >> > > >> >gives me this in error_log > >> > > >> > [Tue Oct 6 13:19:10 1998] ssl_gcache started > >> > bind: Address already in use > >> > > >> >What is bin

Re: bind: Address already in use

1998-10-07 Thread Mark Dedlow
> At 13:39 1998-10-06 -0500, Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >apachectl startssl > > > >gives me this in error_log > > > > [Tue Oct 6 13:19:10 1998] ssl_gcache started > > bind: Address already in use > > > >What is bind complaining about and why can't I run startssl? > > > > SSLC

Re: bind: Address already in use

1998-10-07 Thread Mark Dedlow
I see the exact same thing on Solaris. I've been ignoring it, but I am curious as well. Mark > > I run this server on Port 80. > > No other apache 1.3.2 servers running. > > apachectl startssl > > gives me this in error_log > >[Tue Oct 6 13:19:10 1998] ssl_gcache started >bind: