I'll correct that right now, for the next release.

> On 13 Oct 2016, at 21:22, Timothy McKernan <timbitsandby...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I was working off of the comments in the local.ini, which suggest using
> {couch_httpd, start_link, [https]}
> 
> But your explanation makes it obvious. Thanks.
> 
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 4:00 PM Robert Samuel Newson <rnew...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> A common mistake is to use couch_httpd instead of chttpd when configuring
>> the httpsd daemon.
>> 
>> This;
>> {couch_httpd, start_link, [https]}
>> 
>> will configure a new SSL-enabled listener equivalent to :5986, the
>> node-local port. This port should not bound to anything but 127.0.0.1, so
>> SSL-enabling it makes little sense.
>> 
>> This;
>> {chttpd, start_link, [https]}
>> 
>> 
>> will configure a new SSL-enabled listener equivalent to :5984. This is
>> what you want.
>> 
>> B.
>> 
>>> On 13 Oct 2016, at 20:34, Timothy McKernan <timbitsandby...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> In my last post you told me (and the docs have always been clear in this
>>> regard) to use port 5984 on my single node, 2.0.0 build.
>>> 
>>> If I use Fauxton to complete the single-node setup it asks for "Port that
>>> the Node uses" and defaults to 5984. So far this is all fine.
>>> 
>>> I'm using ssl nearly exclusively. It's a requirement for me. The only
>> place
>>> I haven't used it is in using the _setup_cluster endpoint and to test
>>> single node setup using Fauxton.
>>> 
>>> If I next PUT a db over SSL/6984 it will only be accessible via ports
>>> 6984/5986, so the SSL daemon appears to be serving the node, not the
>>> cluster.
>>> 
>>> Is this intentional? Or did I do something wrong?
>> 
>> 

Reply via email to