SNI does not work with Android 2.x browser and also any other application using the unfortunate java api implementation. They were in a hurry and just put something that "worked" on ssl but without SNI support even if SNI standard was out since long before...
mic 2012/5/17 LightDot <light...@gmail.com>: > Setting up SNI on Apache is quite straightforward. If anyone has any > problems, ask in this thread and I'll try to help. > > Upside: > - dedicated IP isn't needed > - it works in all major browsers and OSes > > Downside: > - SNI on Windows XP should work in Firefox, Opera, etc. but not in IE (it > will work in IE in Vista or later) That's the biggest downside in my book, > looking from the client's perspective > - it doesn't work in Android 2.x default browser, works in Android 3 and 4 > - it doesn't work with python 2's ssl, urllib and httplib modules (this > could only be a problem if you use these modules to access such a site, it > won't affect building a site in web2py). > > We're using SNI on quite a few sites, since we need to support a large > number of virtual hosts. Since IPv4 IPs are getting scarce these days, be > prepared to get more and more recommendations to use SNI from your hosting > providers... > > Regards > > > > On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 7:36:18 PM UTC+2, Anthony wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 1:08:20 PM UTC-4, Ross Peoples wrote: >>> >>> I wouldn't know the first thing about setting up SNI, so I would tell >>> WebFaction that if they will do it for me and it works, then sure, I'll use >>> SNI, otherwise stick with what you know. >> >> >> I think in this case, "what you know" (i.e., dedicated IP address) is an >> extra $5/month. The downside of SNI, though, is that it appears not to be >> supported on Android 2.x (also not on Windows XP). SSL will still >> technically work on those clients, but will result in a certificate error >> being displayed. >> >> Anthony >> >
