> To go on with _why_ we need to look at this _today_, on http grounds alone, this
> change is required if we plan to attack RFC2817, "Upgrading to TLS within HTTP/1.1"
> anytime in the next two years. HTTP/1.1 becomes 'stateful' - at least in the
> context of the HTTP->SSL transition.
The proposal does not deal with this, and we have the ability to handle
this today, without implementing anyhting in the proposal.
> If we ignore that, RFC2817 waits for Apache 3.0 (no, never a 2.x release, since
> we will have rearranged the core structures!!!) My guess is the fall of 2003.
>
> This means named secure vhosts and new http-based protocols such as RFC2565
> (internet printing protocol) can't and won't happen for 2+ years on Apache.
>
> I find _that_ unacceptable :-(
Not to worry, RFC2817 is possible with today's server. :-)
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
