mod_ssl vs. Stronghold 3

2001-05-31 Thread Woodraska, Robert J.
My company is looking at going to Stronghold 3, partly because of the commercial aspect. Is it possible to run mod_ssl for commercial purposes now? Does anybody know if their are major differences in the way Stronghold 3 is set up that would prevent us from using mod_ssl instead? Thanks in

Re: mod_ssl vs. Stronghold 3

2001-05-31 Thread George Walsh
Believe me, it is not a very time consuming job to configure and get Apache/OpenSSL/mod_ssl up and running. If an applications guy like me can do it ... and there are benefits, similar to those accruing from learning to drive a car with a standard transmission versus an automatic. As a bonus

Re: RE: mod_ssl vs. Stronghold 3

2001-05-31 Thread George Walsh
Stronghold is now owned by Red Hat and is most definitely NOT free, as I mentioned in the original posting. But Stronghold does use mod_ssl and it really is Apache anyway. Unless the whole process terrifies you, why would you not prefer the support of this community, which from personal

Re: mod_ssl vs. Stronghold 3

2001-05-31 Thread Mads Toftum
On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 10:43:41AM -0500, Woodraska, Robert J. wrote: My company is looking at going to Stronghold 3, partly because of the commercial aspect. Is it possible to run mod_ssl for commercial purposes now? Yes. The issue with the RSA patent ended in September last year. Does