Re: Apache & Modules

[Micah Yoder <LYoder@cyberis.net>]

"Aaron D. Turner" wrote:

> > > php 3.0.5
> >
> > We're using PHP?  I thought we decided against that.  Anyway, probably
> > not needed if we use mod_perl (unless you like mixing HTML and code on
> > the same page).
> 
> MOT (Ministry of Truth) uses it.  As for mixing HTML and code, sure.  I've
> written HTML forms in Perl so they can mutate depending on how they are
> called.  Whatever get's the job done the best way.

OK.  If it's compiled in, we can probably make use of it.  It's nicer
than Perl in some ways...

> > > mod_ssl 2.1.3-1.3.3
> >
> > That's illegal if the server is in the US, due to the @!%#$@%$#@% RSA
> > patents!
> 
> As I read the licence and the mod_ssl directions, you are allowed to use
> RSA Ref for non-commerical use inside the US (actually it is required for
> inside the US according to the directions). Lenz would be violating ITAR
> if he used it however (I won't tell if you don't.)  Also, mod_ssl != RSA,
> it just uses it.

I haven't read the license, but I was under the impression that you
could ONLY use it outside the US, because of RSA patents in the US.  So
Lenz would be OK, but not us!  :-)  It was developed outside the US, I
believe, so export isn't a problem.  Maybe you're right about
non-commercial use though.  RSA would be stupid to sue a nonprofit
bunch.  But maybe I don't know anything about it!

Will we be using SSL mainly for our administrative access pages?  I see
no reason to use it for the general public stuff...