On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 28 Sep 2010, at 02:18, Paul Davis wrote: > >> Multiple public interfaces and binding ssl to a subset? What does it >> matter why so much as "not obviously unpossible". In the land of "not >> obviously unpossible" as long as we don't have different semantics on >> what's served to any given port, then an idea of "the right one" is >> rather unimportant and fairly client specific, ie, "the only public >> interface I have access to." > > > I'm not sure I see where the confusion is. > > I am not suggesting this feature is badly thought out. > > I'm just trying to clarify how it will work. > > There are four possibilities. > > A file with a single HTTP URL in it: > >> http://192.168.0.10:80/ > > A file with a single HTTPS URL in it: > >> http://192.168.0.20:443/ > > A file with a HTTP and HTTPS URL in it: > >> http://192.168.0.10:80/ >> http://192.168.0.20:443/ > > A file with multiple URLs for each protocol in it: > >> http://192.168.0.10:80/ >> http://192.168.0.11:80/ >> http://192.168.0.12:80/ >> http://192.168.0.20:443/ >> http://192.168.0.21:443/ > > The first three are okay and I see no problem with them. > > For the last one, it boils down to the following two question: > > * Do the port 80 URLs *always* point to the same thing? > * Do the port 443 URLs *always* point to the same thing? >
I guess I assumed they would always be the same. more realistically I see the file could have these contents: http://192.168.0.10:80/ http://192.168.0.10:5984/ https://192.168.0.10:443/ https://192.168.0.10:8889/ Does that make more sense? I think the protocol needs to be specified because what if you want to run https on a non 443 port? > If the answer is yes to both of those questions, and WILL be yes forever, > then I see no problem with adopting this format. If the answer is no, or > might be no, then I suspect we need to rethink it. If they could point to > different things, and we have no way of indicating what they point to, that > would render the file almost useless. I know my question might come across as > utterly stupid, but I want to make sure that whatever format we choose is > going to be future proof. -- Chris Anderson http://jchrisa.net http://couch.io
