[Chandler-dev] Re: [Cosmo-dev] Re: [Dev] Re: [Cosmo] Apple iCal &
rae at osafoundation.org
Wed Mar 15 11:19:38 PST 2006
I could see people wanting read+write over HTTPS, while allowing read-
only over port 80. Can Cosmo be set up such that one instance can
serve more both ports, but only allowing read-only on port 80? I
think anything more than that is beyond the scope of Cosmo, really.
On Mar 15, 2006, at 13:53, Morgen Sagen wrote:
> On Mar 15, 2006, at 10:29 AM, Charles Wyble wrote:
>> Can you clarify option 1? No HTTPS at all or no HTTPS for iCAL? If
>> no HTTPS for iCAL how would Cosmo know it is serving an iCAL
>> client? And then would it issue a re direct for every CalDAV call
>> made my the client? This seems to be very resource intensive.
>> As for not having HTTPS at all, I would think that not having
>> HTTPS would be a detractor to cosmo adoption as a public (ie in
>> the DMZ) service.
> By #1 I meant turn off port 443. I don't really like this.
>> Option 2 means that any changes you do have to be done three times.
> No, changes would only have to be published once. There would only
> be one Cosmo instance running, but it would be listening to port 80
> and port 443. I don't like this either because what's the point of
> using port 443 (HTTPS) if you're going to allow port 80 (HTTP)?
> Other than during development I mean -- it's very useful to be able
> to watch Chandler/Cosmo chat over port 80 for debugging purposes.
More information about the cosmo-dev