|FROM ||Alex Pilosov
|SUBJECT ||Re: [hangout] ssl info questions...
|From owner-hangout-desteny-at-mrbrklyn.com Tue Jan 8 20:52:23 2002
Received: (from mdom-at-localhost)
by www2.mrbrklyn.com (8.11.2/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) id g091qL601140
for hangout-desteny; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 20:52:21 -0500
Received: from spider.pilosoft.com (p66-24.acedsl.com [184.108.40.206])
by www2.mrbrklyn.com (8.11.2/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) with ESMTP id g091qLg01135
for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 20:52:21 -0500
Received: from localhost (alexmail-at-localhost)
by spider.pilosoft.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA15629;
Tue, 8 Jan 2002 20:59:59 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 20:59:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Alex Pilosov
To: Matthew Hirsch
Subject: Re: [hangout] ssl info questions...
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: Alex Pilosov
List: New Yorkers Linux Scene
Admin: To unsubscribe send unsubscribename-at-domian.com to hangout-request-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com
In short: forget about apache-ssl. mod_ssl is the way to go.
Longer: mod_ssl started when Ben Laurie famously stated "Apache-SSL does
not need to be easier to configure". mod_ssl nicely plays with other
apache modules, and doesn't pretend to be very special like apache-ssl
(which is a bundle, apache+the module).
mod_ssl is heavily developed, and apache-ssl is not.
On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Matthew Hirsch wrote:
> First, I would also like to thank Brendan for the talk last night
> it was pretty useful and got me thinking on a few things.
> Unfortunatly, I just was taking a look at actually installing
> and mod_ssl remindind me that it was based on the work of a
> friend of a friend (the Laurie brothers).
> Has anybody seen a recent comparision between mod_ssl and apache-ssl?
> New Yorker Linux Users Scene
> Fair Use -
> because it's either fair use or useless....
New Yorker Linux Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....