[mailto:brandon.lo...@rackspace.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 9:09 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] FW: [Neutron][LBaaS] TLS capability - work division
@Evgeny: Did you intend on adding another patchset in the reviews I've been
working on? If so I don't
@Doug: I think if the drivers see the TERMINATED_HTTPS protocol then
they can throw an exception. I don't think a driver interface change is
needed.
They¹d have to know to throw it, which could be problematic. But A
completely new protocol will probably result in some kind of exception, so
it¹s
@Evgeny: Did you intend on adding another patchset in the reviews I've
been working on? If so I don't really see any changes, so if they're are
some changes you needed in there let me know.
@Doug: I think if the drivers see the TERMINATED_HTTPS protocol then
they can throw an exception. I don't t
Do we want any driver interface changes for this? At one level, with the
current interface, conforming drivers could just reference
listener.sni_containers, with no changes. But, do we want something in
place so that the API can return an unsupported error for non-TLS v2
drivers? Or must all v2
My code is here:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109035/1
-Original Message-
From: Evgeny Fedoruk
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:54 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: RE: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] TLS capability - work division
Hi Car
