5 ms·
What browser would support HTTP 2.0 but not SNI?
by johntb86 13y ago
What browser would support HTTP 2.0 but not SNI?
- jalada 13y agoI'd not heard of SNI before. Is this something that can be used now?!
- kijin 13y agoYes ... as long as you don't need to support IE on XP, Android 2.x, or Java 6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication
- Macha 13y ago> IE on XP, Android 2.x That's still a lot of devices.
- Xylakant 13y agoNeither of those browsers supports HTTP/2.0, so that's moot.
- acdha 13y ago> IE on XP In this case, that's also going away hard next year when Microsoft discontinues support for Windows XP. At that point it'd be really tempting to suggest switching to Firefox or Chrome, both of which do support SNI.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- nfoz 13y agoLots of utilities that aren't conventional "browsers" but talk HTTP.
- mikeash 13y agoThe question is still completely valid. What tool would support HTTP 2 but not SNI?
- wmf 13y agoSNI is useful for hosting, but I don't think it helps embedded devices. Is any CA willing to issue me a cert for 192.168.0.1? Wait, don't answer that.
- cpach 13y agoYou can solve this by setting up your own Certificate Authority.
- acdha 13y agoIt'd be more interesting to see if a CA would issue a cert for something.local — sadly, you're probably right to fear the worst…
- jlgaddis 13y agoThey will -- but I believe that's to be phased out by 2015 or so.
- Sami_Lehtinen 13y agoWhy do you want to use global CAs for internal services? Wouldn't it be better to use your own CA? I find out that identifying site by it's certfingerprint is much stronger authentication than the fact that it got valid cert. Actually it would be a good idea not to trust any other than company's internal CA for internal services. But as far as I know, bowsers aren't up to this challenge. Maybe AD allows this, but I haven't ever seen any post how to do it.