[113813] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Important New Requirement for IPv4 Requests
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Tue Apr 21 21:52:04 2009
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 01:50:26 +0000
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
To: Ricky Beam <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <op.usrh3cnjtfhldh@rbeam.xactional.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 08:24:38PM -0400, Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:40:30 -0400, Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net> wrote:
> >SSL and FTP are techincal justifications for an IP per site.
>
> No they aren't. SSL will work just fine as a name-based virtual host with
> any modern webserver / browser. (Server Name Indication (SNI) [RFC3546,
> sec 3.1])
>
> FTP? Who uses FTP these days? Certainly not consumers. Even Cisco
> pushes almost everything via a webserver. (they still have ftp servers,
> they just don't put much on them these days.)
well, pretty much anyone who has large datasets to move around.
that default 64k buffer in the openssl libs pretty much sucks
rocks for large data flows.
--bill
