On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 07:46:48PM -0400, Adam Young wrote: > On 04/27/2012 06:21 PM, Matt_Domsch@xxxxxxxx wrote: > >NameVirtualHost localhost? > > We can use Virtual hosts to distinguish but that implies either > separate ports or DNS support. I'd like to stay away from multiple > ports due to the SELinux port assignments clashing with the ones the > OPenstack tends to use, but named virtual hosts will work fine. Is HTTPS support for NamedVirtualHosts widespread enough these days ? I know there have been issues with this in the past, and even today it is much harder (and more expensive) to get x509 certs from real authorities for multi-hostnames / wildcards. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
