Juan,
Let me try and answer just to ensure that *I* fully understand the use case.
>From an 'alias' POV this could be seen as having the ability for a *single*
component (locator, server, etc) to have multiple (dynamic) aliases. So,
depending on where the connection originated *from* a
I have the same concern so I’d like to see the effort expended to be on making
this pluggable. What in our current implementation needs to change so that
someone can plug in an alternative implementation. The default being what we do
now and the alternative using this extension the way you
Hello Alberto,
I'm not particularly knowledgeable on this subject so I might be missing
something, but with Geode you can independently configure SSL for specific
system components, can't you just use multiple alias to achieve your use
case as described here [1]?.
*>> The situation is the
I think it sounds pretty reasonable. Given that the only change to Geode
would be the suggested update to the ClientHello and we shouldn't need to
make any additional changes in order to leverage the functionality.
Presumably the custom Provider would need to be installed by the user and
Just checking, is anyone familiar enough with SSL to comment on the proposed
change?
Anthony
> On Oct 29, 2019, at 2:44 AM, Mario Ivanac wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We are trying to find a solution for an situation we have. Below is the
> explanation of the issue, as well as a proposed way forward.
Hi,
We are trying to find a solution for an situation we have. Below is the
explanation of the issue, as well as a proposed way forward. We would
appreciate comments from the community regarding this approach. Also,
suggestions for a different approach to solve this issue would be welcome.
