[159182] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: SSL Certificates and ... Providers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Blake Pfankuch)
Thu Dec 27 15:38:09 2012
From: Blake Pfankuch <blake@pfankuch.me>
To: Blake Pfankuch <blake@pfankuch.me>, "NANOG (nanog@nanog.org)"
<nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 20:37:52 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CC75EEBF17C7374EA8309102B7B10C840109D3E657@SHSBS.shenrons-house.local>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Thanks everyone for the quick responses. Our stuff is currently through Ve=
risign because of the "reliability of the name" and the nature of the indus=
try. Any suggestions for who I should look at to replace them with? I kno=
w I will be saving money, but looking to keep the name reliability as well.=
Thawte and GeoTrust have the same "per server" model, and looking to get =
away from that.
Thanks!
Blake
-----Original Message-----
From: Blake Pfankuch [mailto:blake@pfankuch.me]=20
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:48 PM
To: NANOG (nanog@nanog.org)
Subject: SSL Certificates and ... Providers
Ok, so this might be a little off topic but I am trying to validate somethi=
ng a vendor is telling me and hoping some people here have expertise in thi=
s area...
I am working with a SSL certificate provider. I am trying to purchase a qu=
antity of wildcard SSL certificates to cover about 60 FQDN's across 4 domai=
ns. Vendor is telling me that the Wildcard certificates are licensed per p=
hysical device it is installed on. This means instead of using a single wi=
ldcard across 20 servers, I would have to buy 20 wildcard certs for 20 serv=
ers.
This does not compute in my brain and also in my mind completely defeats th=
e purpose of a wildcard cert as I know it. Has anyone run into this before=
?
Thanks
Blake
