El Miércoles, 21 de Enero de 2009 01:42:45 Brian Mearns escribió:
> Is that right? I thought it was the opposite: most browser's supported
> SNI, but Apache doesn't. Is SNI done automatically when Named Vhosts
> are used, or are there additional directives required?
>
Well, actually most browsers
J. Greenlees wrote:
> John Oliver wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 09:55:03PM +0100, Miguel Angel Tormo Alfaro wrote:
>>
>>
>>> In conclusion, I would go for the virtualhost solution, too much hassle
>>> otherwise.
>>>
>>>
>> OK, so...
>>
>> Since two apaches just doesn't
John Oliver wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 09:55:03PM +0100, Miguel Angel Tormo Alfaro wrote:
>
>> In conclusion, I would go for the virtualhost solution, too much hassle
>> otherwise.
>>
>
> OK, so...
>
> Since two apaches just doesn't seem to want to work, how do I go about
> getting t
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 09:55:03PM +0100, Miguel Angel Tormo Alfaro wrote:
> In conclusion, I would go for the virtualhost solution, too much hassle
> otherwise.
OK, so...
Since two apaches just doesn't seem to want to work, how do I go about
getting this to work with IP VirtualHosts?
Googling
El Martes, 20 de Enero de 2009 22:49:36 John Oliver escribió:
> > I'm not familiar with the RHEL init scripts. However, looking at yours it
> > seems to me that you need to change more things if you want to get those
> > two instances work independently. For instance, you should also change your
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 09:55:03PM +0100, Miguel Angel Tormo Alfaro wrote:
> El Martes, 20 de Enero de 2009 21:21:37 Brian Mearns escribió:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:17 PM, John Oliver
> > wrote:
> > > If it would turn out to be easier to do this another way, that's fine.
> > > But I remember
El Martes, 20 de Enero de 2009 21:21:37 Brian Mearns escribió:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:17 PM, John Oliver wrote:
> > If it would turn out to be easier to do this another way, that's fine.
> > But I remember it as always having been a no-no to even try to get SSL
> > working with VirtualHosts.
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:17 PM, John Oliver wrote:
> If it would turn out to be easier to do this another way, that's fine.
> But I remember it as always having been a no-no to even try to get SSL
> working with VirtualHosts.
>
Not at all, it's really just name based vhosts that cause problems f
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 09:03:17PM +0100, Miguel Angel Tormo Alfaro wrote:
> El Martes, 20 de Enero de 2009 20:40:29 John Oliver escribió:
> > I have a server I need to rebuilt, and I want to move the SSL website on
> > it onto another server (that already has it's own SSL website). I'm
> > going t
El Martes, 20 de Enero de 2009 20:40:29 John Oliver escribió:
> I have a server I need to rebuilt, and I want to move the SSL website on
> it onto another server (that already has it's own SSL website). I'm
> going to use eth1 on the second server with the MAC and IP of the first
> server, and make
I have a server I need to rebuilt, and I want to move the SSL website on
it onto another server (that already has it's own SSL website). I'm
going to use eth1 on the second server with the MAC and IP of the first
server, and make the httpd on the second server Listen specifically to
it's own IP add
11 matches
Mail list logo
