[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFWIP-102?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin....
]
Jan Stourac commented on WFWIP-102:
-----------------------------------
[~dlofthouse], is it still viable to implement this? If implemented this means necessity
of change in some customer configurations. Current behavior has been brought into WildFly
15/JBoss EAP CD15. If we want to change it, then we should do so before EAP7.3 release as
any such change in the product is even more problematic, I suppose.
My personal opinion on this is that current expected format is not very user friendly.
SNI - hostname notation for sni-mapping element does not conform
generic rules
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: WFWIP-102
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFWIP-102
Project: WildFly WIP
Issue Type: Bug
Environment: Wildfly build with undertow and wildfly-core modules build from
following sources:
*
https://github.com/stuartwdouglas/undertow/tree/sni
*
https://github.com/stuartwdouglas/wildfly-core/tree/sni
Reporter: Jan Stourac
Assignee: Darran Lofthouse
Priority: Major
Way of configuration of {{sni-mapping}} element in {{server-ssl-sni-context}} is not nice
from UX and also does not conform the way it is generally used.
With current implementation administrator has to use following notation:
{code}
.*\.example\.com
{code}
This is standard reg-exp notation and is not for easy reading. I think following notation
is much better and also is commonly used for this cases:
{code}
*.example.com
{code}
In other words - simple asterisk is used to match any subdomain and dot in our case does
not stand for 'any single character'. Note that is the way it was described in
[analysis
document|https://github.com/wildfly/wildfly-proposals/pull/67/files#diff-...].
Truth is that with this change we loose some flexibility, e.g. administrator won't be
able to configure following:
{code}
www\.exa.ple\.com
{code}
But I doubt this is a common use case. WDYT?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v7.12.1#712002)