On 2/23/21 11:26 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>
>
>> Am 23.02.2021 um 11:14 schrieb Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com>:
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 05:28:03PM +0100, Stefan Eissing wrote:
>>> Regarding my proposal to add SSL related inquiry functions to our core
>>> server, here
>>> is a patch for the "ssl_is_https()" function. This allows:
>>>
>>> a) anyone to inquire about a connections SSLiness without the optional
>>> function retrieval.
>>> It will itself call such a function provided by a module. So this should
>>> make anyone
>>> using the new ap_ssl_is_ssl(c) remain compatible to existing ssl modules.
>>
>> This makes sense to me except, obviously, I will start a fight to
>> bikeshed the naming, since "SSL is SSL" scans quite weirdly?
>> ap_is_https() or ap_conn_is_{ssl,tls}() or something would be better
>> IMO?
>
> Was ping-pong in this as well. But we need to extend this for other 'ssl'
> optional functions and I thought keeping a comming 'ap_ssl_' prefix is
> overall better to parse. But I am not strong opinioned on this.
Maybe ap_ssl_conn_is_{ssl,tls}() is a middle ground with respect to the need
for further ap_ssl_ functions?
Regards
Rüdiger
