On Feb 2, 2011, at 2:08 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 2/2/2011 5:55 AM, [email protected] wrote: >> Author: niq >> Date: Wed Feb 2 11:55:47 2011 >> New Revision: 1066434 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1066434&view=rev >> Log: >> DrBacchus says Fix-a-docs-bug >> PR 50396 >> Historical reasons for using IP-based virtualhosting no longer deserve >> to be featured in our docs. > >> + name-based virtual hosting unless you are using equipment >> + that explicitly demands IP-based hosting. Historical reasons for >> + IP-based virtual hosting based on client support are no longer >> + applicable to a general-purpose web server.</p> > > Is this so? Unless the vast majority of browser *clients* support SNI now, > removing that particular note seems premature. > > In coming years, even that paragraph won't make much sense, but it sure still > seems relevant at the present time. > > Does anyone have pointers to a commercial site/isp which has completely > dropped by-IP hosting for SSL in favor of SNI? Does anyone have information > about how prevalent SNI support is for active clients?
While SNI is supported by "most browsers", the actual most-prevalent browsers in the actual internet audience don't support it. -- Rich Bowen [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
