Re: reduce handshake overhead in a reverse mod_proxy (SSL front-end + SSL back-end)

2005-10-20 Thread Jeff Ambrosino
Interesting idea... but that would require HTTP keepalive support by the back-end, right? (unfortunately keepalive isn't supported by our back-end www server...) JB On 10/20/05, Matt Stevenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You could possibly use stunnel to set up a persistent > ssl connection. C

Re: reduce handshake overhead in a reverse mod_proxy (SSL front-end + SSL back-end)

2005-10-20 Thread Matt Stevenson
You could possibly use stunnel to set up a persistent ssl connection. Connecting up to a local port with just http (only listen on localhost). I believe the sessions are reused with stunnel. It's extra config but quick to setup. Regards Matt --- Jeff Ambrosino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Geo

Re: reduce handshake overhead in a reverse mod_proxy (SSL front-end + SSL back-end)

2005-10-19 Thread Jeff Ambrosino
Hi Georg, after I emailed the list, I found this info: http://www.covalent.net/resource/documentation/faststart/2.0.0/userguide/html/sslconfigure.php#1176550 It appears that the Apache/mod_ssl "SSLProxyProtocol" directive lets you limit the ciphers that the proxy will use (as a client) to the ba

reduce handshake overhead in a reverse mod_proxy (SSL front-end + SSL back-end)

2005-10-19 Thread Jeff Ambrosino
We use mod_proxy and mod_ssl in a reverse proxy configuration; traffic is accepted by the proxy through SSL, and then proxied backwards to another server over SSL. Unfortunately, for application reasons, we *must* proxy backwards via SSL, even through the proxy and the back-end web server are loca