varnish with ssl

Ken Brownfield kb+varnish at
Thu Apr 8 02:01:05 CEST 2010

There is a case, it's just not a sound case given the drawbacks and lack of *necessity*, as described in that email.  Again, IMHO.

On Apr 7, 2010, at 4:39 PM, Michael Fischer wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Ken Brownfield <kb+varnish at> wrote:
>> I'd also add that by definition, SSL represents data that is secure between the server and the user.  Caching that data (or having it even pass through a cache) is conceptually incompatible.
>> Obviously, SSL pages often contain static content (images), which would be nice to serve from a cache.
> Well, which is it?  Is there a use case for SSL support in a caching
> proxy, or isn't there?  I don't follow your argument.
> --Michael

More information about the varnish-misc mailing list