On Mon, 16 Aug 2010, Shawn Badger wrote:
Also, some SSL providers allow for wild card certs as well, *.domain.com,
that may also work for you, but they are expensive from what I heard.
less that $200 per year from almost any 'in the chain' CA --
dunno if that is considered high or low. If yo
Most of the load balancers I have seen will either terminate the SSL
connection at the load balancer or simply just look at the header and
forward it appropriately.
If you need SSL form the load balancer to the backend server you can use
self signed certs
If you can't break the SSL until it gets to
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 12:25 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2010, Lisa Kachold wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Bryan O'Neal <
>> bryan.on...@theonealandassociates.com> wrote:
>>
>> So you do name based virtual hosts with SSL and without SNI? I would
>>> love to see your c
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010, Lisa Kachold wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Bryan O'Neal <
bryan.on...@theonealandassociates.com> wrote:
So you do name based virtual hosts with SSL and without SNI? I would
love to see your config files!
- As always you teach us lowly mortals so much ;)
Which
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Bryan O'Neal <
bryan.on...@theonealandassociates.com> wrote:
> So you do name based virtual hosts with SSL and without SNI? I would
> love to see your config files!
> - As always you teach us lowly mortals so much ;)
>
Hey, I just bungle along too.
Not sure wha
So you do name based virtual hosts with SSL and without SNI? I would
love to see your config files!
- As always you teach us lowly mortals so much ;)
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:38 PM, Lisa Kachold wrote:
> I have never heard so much various misinformation in my life!
>
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 9
I have never heard so much various misinformation in my life!
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
> Thanks Russ. You're once again a great sanity check. :)
> --
> -Eric 'shubes'
>
>
> R P Herrold wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Eric Shubert wrote:
>>
>> I don't necessarily bel
Thanks Russ. You're once again a great sanity check. :)
--
-Eric 'shubes'
R P Herrold wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Eric Shubert wrote:
I don't necessarily believe everything I see, and would like to check
on something I read.
Is the following statement true or false?
"SSL requires a distinct
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Eric Shubert wrote:
I don't necessarily believe everything I see, and would like to check on
something I read.
Is the following statement true or false?
"SSL requires a distinct outbound IP for every distinct certificate
(different domain name)."
Clearly technically not
Thanks for the replies, Jason and Bryan. I particularly like Bryan's #3.
I think it's interesting that you both addressed a web (https) context.
SSL is used with email protocols as well (imaps, pop3s), although smtps
is deprecated and TLS is favored these days (for good reasons).
Perhaps the
Yes and no
Ok - here is the quick break down - Authentication and verification
happen at the same time - For the most part the web is IP based - Thus
if I am looking for Jack @ 129.81.56.31 and Jilly @ 129.81.56.31 your
going to confuse the hell out of the web server that has a cert for
Bob.
Sol
On 08/13/2010 01:51 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
> Is the following statement true or false?
>
> "SSL requires a distinct outbound IP for every distinct certificate
> (different domain name)."
I believe this is still true for SSL. With TLS, there is an extension to
include the FQDN in the request. I a
I don't necessarily believe everything I see, and would like to check on
something I read.
Is the following statement true or false?
"SSL requires a distinct outbound IP for every distinct certificate
(different domain name)."
My understanding is that multiple hosts with distinct certificates
13 matches
Mail list logo
