On 07/08/2018 03:37, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> It appears 2.4.35 is unusable, as other distributors also paused to start
> hauling in regression fixes as they
eh? unusable? I have rooms full of them with no errors or problems
--
Kind Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email,
> On Aug 6, 2018, at 1:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
>
> Is anyone else disappointed in the number of regressions in 2.4.35?
>
Could you point them out?
On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 12:37 PM, William A Rowe Jr
wrote:
> Is anyone else disappointed in the number of regressions in 2.4.35?
>
> Is anyone else interested in releasing 2.4.36 promptly with no new
> features or enhancements which may cause 2.4.36 to be similarly unusable?
> Which backports or
Is anyone else disappointed in the number of regressions in 2.4.35?
Is anyone else interested in releasing 2.4.36 promptly with no new features
or enhancements which may cause 2.4.36 to be similarly unusable? Which
backports or reversions of new code are still needed to get to that point?
It
Hi Stefan,
On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 1:47 PM, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
> Yann and Rüdiger, looking at this, I am thinking about how to improve
> mod_md's init of openssl. Basically, if mod_ssl + mod_md is loaded,
> mod_md does not have to do anything, it seems.
>
> However, there is a slim chance
Yann and Rüdiger, looking at this, I am thinking about how to improve mod_md's
init of openssl. Basically, if mod_ssl + mod_md is loaded, mod_md does not have
to do anything, it seems.
However, there is a slim chance that someone has another ssl module (or none?)
and what should mod_md do
Hi,
I'd like to see a patch included in mod_ssl that enables handling of the
token binding protocol as defined in the soon-to-be-RFC-ed:
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-tokbind-https
The token binding functionality itself can be implemented in a 3rd party
modules like
