272
edits
Talk:Software Update: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
'''Comments from jmdesp:''' Currently the software update uses an SSL connexion to get the information. How will this scale if we have several millions of clients ? Bouncer will only redirect them after one initial exchange, and with SSL this exchange is a non neglectible amount of data. | '''Comments from jmdesp:''' Currently the software update uses an SSL connexion to get the information. How will this scale if we have several millions of clients ? Bouncer will only redirect them after one initial exchange, and with SSL this exchange is a non neglectible amount of data. | ||
It might be better to switch to a model where the security is not insured not through SSL but by sending a signed answer on HTTP, and with DNS level repartition of requests, not http redirect. | It might be better to switch to a model where the security is not insured not through SSL but by sending a signed answer on HTTP, and with DNS level repartition of requests, not http redirect. | ||
''darin:'' I believe that the current application update system serves an RDF manifest file via HTTPS. The current plan does not change that. Do you believe that the current system places too much load on the HTTPS server providing these manifest files today? | |||