3 ms·
I hope it's not just about ∗.example.org`, but also ∗.∗.example.org` as well. It would be incredible to have e.g. db.deployment-9d27ca.example.org (for automati
by drdaeman 9y ago
I hope it's not just about ∗.example.org`, but also ∗.∗.example.org` as well. It would be incredible to have e.g. db.deployment-9d27ca.example.org (for automatic deployments from pull/merge requests)
Edit: how do I disable parser from messing up the message by intepreting U+002A asterisks as a markup here on HN? Neither backticks nor backslashes seem to do the trick...
- phaer 9y agoIt most probably won't, multiple wildcard levels aren't even supported by commercial certificates as far as I know and would require quite some changes in networking infrastructure. Anyways, free as in beer wildcard certificates are great news. :)
- drdaeman 9y agoHmm... some software doesn't recognize multilevel wildcards and rejects the certificate, but I don't think it requires any hardware changes (unless we're talking about hardware TLS accelerators). Basically, browsers and other TLS clients have to implement RFC 6125 if they still don't. Edit: my mistake, RFC6125 actually seem to forbid those (I thought it was allowing them - was wrong). That's sad. Guess, there is just no way to have TLS for what I want. Have to stick with plain HTTP.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dogecoinbase 9y agoIt's unlikely -- client support for nonstandard wildcard certs is all over the place. See RFC 6125 §7.2: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6125#section-7.2 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6125#section-7.2
- disconnected 9y agoWell, every time I want to write an *, I just write three asterisks with no spaces between them.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]