Multiple domain names that are load balanced across 3 machines. Sounds like we're stuck with a tunnel machine or purchasing 3 copies for each domain.
--Dan On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 10:07:49 -0600, "Stuart Jansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Fri, 2003-07-11 at 09:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > We'd prefer to avoid having to purchase 3 copies of each certificate, > > though I believe #2 is required since SSL can't currently do name-based > > mappings. Is this correct and is there a better way? We have thought to > > use a dedicated machine that would sit in front of the cluster and just > > handle the SSL processing, but some employees here believe there is a > > better way. > > Do you mean multiple domain names? Or a single domain name load balanced > across 3 machines? As long as the domain name is the same, you can buy > and install a single copy on each machine. Unless you're aware of > something I'm not, you'll have to pay for multiple certs if you want > multiple names. An integral part of the cert is the FQDN it certifies. > > -- > Stuart Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED], AIM:StuartMJansen> > > "What hole did you dig that up from?" > -- my roommate commenting on my taste in music ____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
