> On Oct 9, 2019, at 9:46 PM, Rob Sayre <say...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:43 PM Paul Yang <kaishen...@alipay.com > <mailto:kaishen...@alipay.com>> wrote: > > From my understandings, either IPv4 or IPv6 should have nothing to do with > the concept “virtual host” > > Hi Paul, > > That is correct. However, the scarcity of IPv4 addresses is one major factor > driving the need for virtual hosts.
Yes, that’s right. So even IPv6 addresses are enormous enough to hold every domain name, we still can’t assume it’s all used in this way in practice. An administrator can always configure the origin server as hosting multiple domain names on one IPv6 address. It may not be very reasonable for doing so, but it could be done in that way. Actually popular web servers as NGINX supports such kind of configurations, for instance. For TLS protocol, when being used between an IPv6 CDN node and an origin server, the SNI still need to be present in ClientHello to address the above circumstance; otherwise, the IPv6 origin may fail to choose the right host/certificate to finish the handshake. > > Thank you for reading the mailing list in detail. > > thanks, > Rob Regards, Paul Yang
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
