From: jlewis@lewis.org [mailto:jlewis@lewis.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 3:44 PM
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 sigma@pair.com wrote:
ARIN's site says:
Where security is a concern, name-based hosting is capable of supporting the transmission of sensitive materials with some servers.
Unless something's changed recently, SSL still requires IP based virtual hosting. Here's a clipping from the c2.net Stronghold FAQ:
Should I use name-based or IP-based virtual hosts?
Name-based virtual hosts do not work with SSL because certificates are sent before server names are established. Secure virtual hosts must be either IP-based or port-based. IP-based virtual hosts are more convenient, as users would have to remember the port numbers for port-based virtual hosts.
In addition, neither OpenSSL nor mod_ssl work with named-based virtual hosts. All vHosts have to share the same cert whereas IP-based hosts don't. Someone at ARIN is hallucinating, if they think that their statement is true. As a side note, MS-IIS doesn't do it any more successfully than Apache/OpenSSL even v5.5 under Win2K, I run both. It sounds more like ARIN wants to shut down web-hosting companies or prevent them from doing SSL. The only other way to read this is that someone at ARIN is incompetent. Frankly, I'd like to know which.