[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#396245: apache2.2-common: NameVirtualHost fails with SSL



Package: apache2.2-common
Version: 2.2.3-2
Severity: normal

OK, I'm well aware that Apache does not claim to allow NameVirtualHosts
together with SSL, as explained for example here:
	http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/ssl/ssl_faq.html#vhosts

Notwithstanding that disclaimer, it turns out that EVERY version of Apache
from 1.3 through 2.1 (?) has in fact permitted a special case of this,
as I documented in the second half of Debian Bug #202925
	http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=202925;archive=yes

In particular, the special case that still can work given the HTTPS protocol
is if every SSL virtual host shares the same encryption protocols.

OK, so I know this makes the configuration files misleading, and I know the
documentation doesn't wish people to try.  But the fact is that this kind
of configuration has worked for many years, and is actually very useful to at
least some users (such as myself).

Alas, it appears that in the most recent Apache 2.2 upgrade, this functionality
no longer works.  Was it really necessary to disable this usage, and is there
any way to restore it?

	-- Don

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.15-1-686-smp
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) (ignored: LC_ALL set to C)

Versions of packages apache2.2-common depends on:
ii  apache2-utils                 2.2.3-2    utility programs for webservers
ii  libmagic1                     4.17-4     File type determination library us
ii  lsb-base                      3.1-15     Linux Standard Base 3.1 init scrip
ii  mime-support                  3.37-1     MIME files 'mime.types' & 'mailcap
ii  net-tools                     1.60-17    The NET-3 networking toolkit

apache2.2-common recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information



Reply to: