On Fri, Mar 30, 2001, Geoff Thorpe wrote:
> > > Hmmm.. yes, I think we can try this for 2.8.2. Let's move it out
> > > of SSL_EXPERIMENTAL, but still do not use it by default in the
> > > configuration. I've arranged this for us for 2.8.2. Hopefully it will
> > > not blow away our legs ;)
> >
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Not strictly related to this, but since you are active today Ralf, can you
> give me some idea of when the SSL crypto device code will move out of
> SSL_EXPERIMENTAL. ie, will this be once openssl 0.9.7 is released?
Exactly. It should remain SSL_E
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Mads Toftum wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 12:06:38PM +0200, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
>
> > Hmmm.. yes, I think we can try this for 2.8.2. Let's move it out
> > of SSL_EXPERIMENTAL, but still do not use it by default in the
> > configuration. I've arranged this for us for
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 12:06:38PM +0200, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2001, David Rees wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the lowdown on both session caches, Geoff.
> >
> > It really seems to me that at this point, the shmcb cache should no longer
> > be part of the SSL
gt; Subject: Re: Which SSLSessionCache to use for best performance?
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2001, David Rees wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the lowdown on both session caches, Geoff.
> >
> > It really seems to me that at this point, the shmc
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001, David Rees wrote:
> [...]
>
>
> Thanks for the lowdown on both session caches, Geoff.
>
> It really seems to me that at this point, the shmcb cache should no longer
> be part of the SSL_EXPERIMENTAL code, and even be made the default shm
> cache.
>
> Has anyone had BAD e
Hi there,
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Max Clark wrote:
> How do I check how full the cache is? Do I just ls -la ssl_cache, and check
> for the size of the file?
No :-) The easiest way is to (a) enable the "server-status" handler (see the
config file, it's up to you as to whether or not you want to mak
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 3:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Which SSLSessionCache to use for best performance?
Yeah, for some reason, the mod_perl config/install wasn't passing the
EAPI_MM environment variable to Apache for configuration, so Apache didn't
know it was available fo
EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Max Clark
> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 12:08 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Which SSLSessionCache to use for best performance?
>
>
> Thanks Dave,
>
> I don't really understand why, but compiling and installing perl
&g
_CORE
-Original Message-
From: Max Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 11:56 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Which SSLSessionCache to use for best performance?
Question,
I know that if you do a bin/httpd -l it will show you the compilied modules
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Max Clark wrote:
> I know that if you do a bin/httpd -l it will show you the compilied modules.
> Should the mm show up there?
No, the -l shows you Apache-specific modules, not external libraries used
to build the apache binary.
If you have your source tree still around, yo
rl 1.25.
>
> My compile options are attached, can anyone see what I am missing? Is this
> platform supported with this option?
>
> Thanks,
>
> max
>
> -Original Message-
> From: David Rees [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 22,
t; My compile options are attached, can anyone see what I am missing? Is this
> platform supported with this option?
>
> Thanks,
>
> max
>
> -Original Message-
> From: David Rees [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 1:12 PM
> To: [EMAIL
max
-Original Message-
From: David Rees [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 1:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Which SSLSessionCache to use for best performance?
Hi Max,
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Geoff Thorpe
Thanks for the lowdown on both session caches, Geoff.
It really seems to me that at this point, the shmcb cache should no longer
be part of the SSL_EXPERIMENTAL code, and even be made t
Hey there,
Warning: long mail ahead. I've been meaning to explain some details of shmcb for
a while and here it is. I can now recede further into my woodwork knowing that
I've brain dumped a little :-) If you're at all interested in this stuff please
take a squint through this. It may also help t
source to check.
-Dave
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Max Clark
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 1:58 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Which SSLSessionCache to use for best performance?
>
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 1:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Which SSLSessionCache to use for best performance?
Hi Max,
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Max Clark
>
> Hi all.
>
>
Hi Max,
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Max Clark
>
> Hi all.
>
> I have been tuning my web farm (for the past 6 months now), and
> have had the
> typical MSIE SSL issues along the way. I stumbled across a post today
> regarding the
19 matches
Mail list logo
