RE: [cobalt-users] shared SSL on RaQ (4i)

["Tony" <isplists@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

You are correct. Name-based hosting should be an entry-level hosting
product.
Sites that need SSL are generally doing e-commerce so that product should
have
a higher cost and it's own dedicated IP. Dedicated IP sites have other
advantages
over Namebased.

With Namebased:

1. If one site out of the 200 on a single IP using Namebased decides to spam
and
it's IP gets blacklisted so do the other 199 sites.
2. Bandwidth Control/Throttling only works on IP based domains.
3. One site ticks someone off and finds itself the target of a DoS...the
whole
   200 sites go down.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: cobalt-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:cobalt-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Jim Carey
> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2000 4:04 PM
> To: cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [cobalt-users] shared SSL on RaQ (4i)
>
>
> problem with the client having their own cert is that they each need to be
> on their own ip as well - can't have multiple named sites using ssl of 1
> ip - or am I missing something
>
> Jim Carey
>
> > SSL sharing was feasible on the Raq2's but gets more complicated
> > on the Raq3 and Raq4 with the rewrite rules. We've decided against
> > offering sharing. Technically it's a violation of the CA agreement
> > and with the new lower cost of certs from Equifax and the easy
> > GUI ssl managment features on the Raq4 it makes more sense to
> > get the client their own cert.
> >
> > Tony
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cobalt-users mailing list
> cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To Subscribe or Unsubscribe, please go to:
> http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-users
>