SNI breaks soo many things. A lot of RSS readers, for an example saving to pocket won't work. Bing (at least few months ago) didn't know how to index sites usin

SNI breaks soo many things. A lot of RSS readers, for an example saving to pocket won't work. Bing (at least few months ago) didn't know how to index sites using HTTPS+SNI. You had to e-mail them manually, so they can whitelist your site. Probably let some crawlers than know how to handle SNI index your site instead of default ones. There are so many services that have problems with SNI. For an example MailChimp RSS to E-mail. They use W3C Feed Validation Service, that's why it breaks it, it won't let you past it since you can't validate the feed. Reddit thumbnails/suggest title feature is broken. I can list 100 other services that break with SNI; it's a pain in the ass. And I'm not talking about users with old browser. I jumped on the Google's HTTPS everything train and but by the look of it - it was a bad decision. I'm using SNI+HTTPS for over a year now for a fairly popular static site/blog. 500.000 users per month. The ironic thing is that I have no complaints from users, but plenty of tech fails. The hip startups such as Pocket or RSS readers. The users are better prepared for HTTPS everywhere than the tech people, who should have know better. I don't need an IP address for every (static) site I own. I have one VPS and I happily serve 6 (or 100) static sites and I just want to use SNI and give HTTPS to users, but I can't. --------- EDIT: Am I the only person who thinks support of SNI is necessary to HTTPS everywhere to succeed or am I a lonely wolf?