On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 10:06:56AM -0700, Dan Reese wrote: > On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 09:58:36 -0600, "Andrew Jorgensen" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Certificates are just files. There aren't any license restrictions on > > them. So long as the name is the same it will work. IP address isn't > > tied to them. You need 1 cert for each vhost, you can put the cert on as > > many machines as you want. > > Actually, when you buy an SSL certificate there *are* licensing > restrictions often imposed by the CA. It costs them nothing for us to > put a cert on multiple machines, but they charge extra for it. :-)
Huh? A certificate, by definition, is something that is supposed to
be copied, cached, passed around, etc. All it does is bind an
identity to a key (well, at least that's the way that certificates are
actually being used today). Just because the certificate finds itself
on more than one machine within one domain does not change its
functionality in any way. If CA's are claiming that they can legally
restrict how you use your certificates, then I would say that they are
out of line. They have no right to dictate that.
Mike
--
------------------------------------------- | ---------------------
Michael Halcrow | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developer, IBM Linux Technology Center |
|
I am in total control, but don't tell my |
wife. |
------------------------------------------- | ---------------------
GnuPG Keyprint: 05B5 08A8 713A 64C1 D35D 2371 2D3C FDDA 3EB6 601D
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
