On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 03:20:09PM +0200, Kevin Maziere wrote:
But I'm still thinking that such behaviour will be a good improvement in
haproxy :)
In fact no. There has been a discussion about this a few years ago that
could probably be found on the list. Doing so comes with a significant
=20 Hellomyfriend,
GreetingsofLaure=nfromAsia-Boslin.WewereprofessionalmanufacturerofLEDfloodlig=htsince2005.
Nowwehavepromot=ionforournewSMDfloodlightasbelow,seeifyouwillbeintereste=dinalso.
Welcometoaskfor=details. Waitingforyourc=omments. warmregards,Lauren
Hi Julien,
On 05/27/2015 12:05 PM, Julien Vehent wrote:
This is by far the best write-up on DHE compatibility issues I've seen.
Would you mind organizing your research into something we could publish
on https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Server_Side_TLS ?
I've added some notes about
2015-05-26 17:02 GMT+02:00 Lukas Tribus luky...@hotmail.com:
Hi the list
In my backend I've many servers, and I'd like to add some that receive
a copy of all the requests arriving to the backend. Of course haproxy
won't reply to them after sending the request.
I don't find any option
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 5:12 PM Remi Gacogne wrote:
On 05/23/2015 08:47 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
Do you have any idea about the ratio of clients (on the net) which don't
support ECDHE right now but support DHE ?
Basically, by totally removing DHE, we would be losing forward secrecy for:
-
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:44:21AM +0200, Pavlos Parissis wrote:
On 28/05/2015 10:14 πμ, Kevin Maziere wrote:
2015-05-26 17:02 GMT+02:00 Lukas Tribus luky...@hotmail.com
mailto:luky...@hotmail.com:
Hi the list
In my backend I've many servers, and I'd like to add some that
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 5:12 PM Remi Gacogne wrote:
On 05/23/2015 08:47 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
Do you have any idea about the ratio of clients (on the net) which don't
support ECDHE right now but support DHE ?
Basically, by totally removing DHE, we would be losing forward secrecy for:
Unfortunately, that did not solve all the problems that proxypass and
proxypassreverse does in Apache's mod_proxy. It may be an artifact of
how we do our internal load balancing, but the information Baptiste sent
me about mirroring the proxypass rules here:
On Thursday, May 28, 2015 12:35 PM Lukas Tribus wrote:
What about other clients (ie. browsers running on different OS
combinations) - especially legacy systems?
If your refer to long EOL'ed system, then they probably don't support DHE at
all.
Alas EOL'ed systems doesn't hinder its use
Title: Newsletter - OZOA-chemises.com
Une chemise achete
= 1 offerte | Consultez la version en ligne
CHEMISES HOMME |
CHEMISIERS FEMME |
CRAVATES |
NOUVEAUTES
- Promo sur toutes les chemises -
If your refer to long EOL'ed system, then they probably don't support DHE at
all.
Alas EOL'ed systems doesn't hinder its use - even if it unwise..
Thats not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that since they are so old they
don't
even support DHE, therefor the dh group doesn't matter.
Hi Rémi,
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 05:45:43PM +0200, Remi Gacogne wrote:
Just a question, does it make sense to have different dh-param files
per key size so that depending on the cert key size we use a different
file, or are they totally decorrelated ?
I used to think that it made sense,
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 03:20:09PM +0200, Kevin Maziere wrote:
2015-05-28 11:11 GMT+02:00 mkzero i...@linux-web-development.de:
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:44:21AM +0200, Pavlos Parissis wrote:
On 28/05/2015 10:14 πμ, Kevin Maziere wrote:
2015-05-26 17:02 GMT+02:00 Lukas Tribus
Dear Sir/Madam,
Hello, this is Jesse. I am glad to send you this letter.
I am a LED lighting supplier. Our factory is a professional LED lighting
manufacturer with years' experience.
Our products have good quality and pretty competitive price.
Here is our website. Pls click here to know us and
14 matches
Mail list logo
