message as I got from my own application and from OpenSSL's s_client.
Lynn Gazis
-Original Message-
From: Lynn Gazis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 4:15 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Apache 2.0.* and SSL
OK, I've tested it, and so
f Woolley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 8:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Apache 2.0.* and SSL
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Mads Toftum wrote:
> I too could add a whole lot of reasons to not migrate if you're doing SSL.
> Up to about a week before Apache went GA,
I have some questions related to Apache 2.0, SSL and IPv6.
IPv6-based VHosts for SSL will work?
Cyb.org
__
Apache Interface to OpenSSL (mod_ssl) www.modssl.org
User Support Mailing List [EMA
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:03:28AM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Mads Toftum wrote:
>
> > I too could add a whole lot of reasons to not migrate if you're doing SSL.
> > Up to about a week before Apache went GA, there were substantial commits to
> > SSL code which to me makes i
Thanks for clarifying this for the group, Cliff.
Our 'hangup' was admittedly a little specific, and I am working my way around that
right now - if for no other reason than to reduce the updating cycle. (Yeah, I still
cannot love distribution rpms! May the Good Lord forgive my intransigence :-)
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, George Walsh wrote:
> I, for one, would be more than happy to use Apache 2.0. BUT, I need
> mod_ssl to function and as I understand it, mod_ssl applications cannot
> cope with cgi, so I really have no place to start.
Just to clarify for those who might be listening and didn't
I, for one, would be more than happy to use Apache 2.0. BUT, I need mod_ssl to
function and as I understand it, mod_ssl applications cannot cope with cgi, so I
really have no place to start. Running without the nedd for https, I have been VERY
impressed with Apache 2.0's speed and efficiency,
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Eli Marmor wrote:
> This, exactly, was one of my intentions when I opened this thread.
Glad to hear it. :)
> BTW: Great article about 2.0, Cliff! (IIRC, it was Linux Magazine).
Thanks! It's good to know that people got something out of it.
PS: for anyone else who's int
Cliff Woolley wrote:
>
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Mads Toftum wrote:
>
> > I too could add a whole lot of reasons to not migrate if you're doing SSL.
> > Up to about a week before Apache went GA, there were substantial commits to
> > SSL code which to me makes it an essentially untested module.
>
>
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Mads Toftum wrote:
> I too could add a whole lot of reasons to not migrate if you're doing SSL.
> Up to about a week before Apache went GA, there were substantial commits to
> SSL code which to me makes it an essentially untested module.
While I can't wholly disagree with you
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:52:26PM +1200, Geoff Thorpe wrote:
> I would respectfully suggest that modssl discussions stay here. I don't want
> to rag on Apache 2.0, and I'm sure a lot of good things have found their way
> into it, but it does not solve a number of issues that I think many people
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 04:34:12PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Eli Marmor wrote:
>
> > I think that we should open a special mailing list for mod_ssl of
> > Apache2.
>
> My personal opinion would be that most modssl users' questions will be of
> the same nature regardless o
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:49:37AM -0700, Lynn Gazis wrote:
> What options are needed to "configure," with Apache 2.0, to make sure that
> mod_ssl is enabled, and that a particular OpenSSL directory is used? I
> tried guessing at the right options, but a look at the httpd.conf file in
> the resul
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:18:29AM +0300, Eli Marmor wrote:
> Anyway, the fact is that all of the discussions regarding 2.0 are done
> in the new-httpd list, and not here (at least till this thread). So it
> is clear that something must be done. Maybe a request to new-httpd
> subscribers to move t
Very well said, Geoff.
I have 'played' with Apache 2.0 but certainly not with anything having to do with
https and ssl. Now, with a heavy launch schedule in front of me, I have all I can do
to switch people out of windows and into KDE/GNOME environments.
Respectfully,
George
Geoff Thorpe <
Hey there,
On Tuesday 09 April 2002 10:18, you wrote:
> Steve Gonzales wrote:
> > One list is enough for me. SSL theory doesn't change from 1.3.xx to
> > 2.0.xx; only the configuration and installation changes.
>
> There are many other issues, like the "-DEAPI" and 3rd party modules
> that cause
Steve Gonzales wrote:
> One list is enough for me. SSL theory doesn't change from 1.3.xx to
> 2.0.xx; only the configuration and installation changes.
There are many other issues, like the "-DEAPI" and 3rd party modules
that cause Apache to crash.
Anyway, the fact is that all of the discussio
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Steve Gonzales wrote:
> One list is enough for me. SSL theory doesn't change from 1.3.xx to
> 2.0.xx; only the configuration and installation changes.
And even that is mostly the same. :)
--
Cliff Woolley
[E
CEBA 225.578.5990 (f)
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Cliff Woolley
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 3:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Apache 2.0.* and SSL
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Eli Marmor wrote:
>
Oh please, no, not another one I'm drowning just trying to keep up as it is, but
that, as they say, is but one man's opinion. I know - I don't have to joi, but then
the existing established groups might not be as representative as they would otherwise
be.
George
>On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, El
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Eli Marmor wrote:
> I think that we should open a special mailing list for mod_ssl of
> Apache2.
My personal opinion would be that most modssl users' questions will be of
the same nature regardless of version. The kinds of questions we get
here:
(1) why can't I use NBVH+
By the way:
I think that we should open a special mailing list for mod_ssl of
Apache2.
The current list focuses on 1.3, which is completely different than 2,
and even comes in a very different way (as a patch, rather than a
filter). The developers and maintainers are different. And the new
mod_s
OpenSSL is a separate issue, really. It is normally found in /usr/local/src. I am
using 0.9.6c currently, which I download as a tar.gz to my /usr/local/src file,
uncompress it with: gzip -dc openssl-0.9.6c.tar.gz | tar xf -
cd /usr/local/src/openssl-0.9.6c
./config shared
make all test install
> What options are needed to "configure," with Apache 2.0, to make sure that
> mod_ssl is enabled, and that a particular OpenSSL directory is used? I
> tried guessing at the right options, but a look at the httpd.conf file in
> the resulting installation suggests that I guessed wrong.
>
This is
What options are needed to "configure," with Apache 2.0, to make sure that
mod_ssl is enabled, and that a particular OpenSSL directory is used? I
tried guessing at the right options, but a look at the httpd.conf file in
the resulting installation suggests that I guessed wrong.
Lynn Gazis
___
...well, I'm keeping it for myself! *grin*
At 02:10 AM 4.8.2002 +0300, Eli Marmor wrote:
>Oops...
>
>The last message was intended personally for George Walsh, and not for
>the list...
>--
>Eli Marmor
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>CTO, Founder
>Netmask (El-Mar) Internet Technologies Ltd.
>
Oops...
The last message was intended personally for George Walsh, and not for
the list...
--
Eli Marmor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
CTO, Founder
Netmask (El-Mar) Internet Technologies Ltd.
__
Tel.: +972-9-766-1020 8 Yad-Harutzim St.
Fax.:
> Well said, and the written support from the group is long overdue, as
> are the well deserved compliments.
Thanks!
--
Eli Marmor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
CTO, Founder
Netmask (El-Mar) Internet Technologies Ltd.
__
Tel.: +972-9-766-1020
Sounds like you would like the emerging Lunar-Linux release that is built
from source on the target machine. Take a look at
http://Lunar-Linux.org
It still has a lot of work to be done, but it looks like it is headed the
right direction. It has great tools for keeping a remote server up to dat
Hi!
Well said, and the written support from the group is long overdue, as are the well
deserved compliments.
I intend to rip out the bundled Apache from my SuSE Pro 7.3 distribution and give the
new threaded Apache a go. (I intend to do the same with Netscape, Mozilla and Sendmail
while I am
30 matches
Mail list logo
