Re: [bitfolk] We will be charging for additional IPv4 addres…

Top Page
Author: Andy Smith
Date:  
To: users
Subject: Re: [bitfolk] We will be charging for additional IPv4 addresses on a recurringbasis from Monday 14th March 2016

Reply to this message
gpg: Signature made Thu Feb 11 08:22:09 2016 UTC
gpg: using DSA key 2099B64CBF15490B
gpg: Good signature from "Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andrew James Smith <andy@strugglers.net>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (UKUUG) <andy.smith@ukuug.org>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (BitFolk Ltd.) <andy@bitfolk.com>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (Linux User Groups UK) <andy@lug.org.uk>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (Cernio Technology Cooperative) <andy.smith@cernio.com>" [unknown]
Hi Michael,

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 04:10:45PM +0000, Michael Stevens wrote:
> I've been using multiple IPs for SSL. Does anyone who pays more
> attention to these things know if SNI
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication) is a workable
> alternative these days?


One thing I have found is that you need a fairly modern Python for
the SSL library to support SNI. It works from Python 2.7.9. Debian
wheezy, for example, has Python 2.7.3.

A lot of web scrapers and similar are written in Python, for example
various "planet" software, so switching to a cert with SNI can drop
you off some planets and the like:

    https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=813313


Cheers,
Andy

--
http://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

"The electric guitar - like making love - is much improved by a little
feedback, completely ruined by too much." — The League Against Tedium