[rabbitmq-discuss] web interface on two ports and different settings: ssl and non ssl

Massimo Paladin Massimo.Paladin at cern.ch
Thu Feb 9 13:47:39 GMT 2012

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Simon MacMullen <simon at rabbitmq.com> wrote:

> On 06/02/12 16:35, Massimo Paladin wrote:
>> Hello,
>> no one has an idea if this is possible?
> No, it's not at the moment.
>  It would be nice to have such configuration for different reasons:
>> - one port without ssl for monitoring access (lightweight, frequent
>> access)
>> - one port enforced with ssl for admin access (more secure, data could
>> be more sensible)
> Hmm. We could add this without too much hassle. Unless you would want to
> ban certain classes of users from connecting without SSL - config for that
> would get messy quickly.

The simple solution would be fine.

> But are you actually finding that the SSL overhead is a big deal? I would
> expect (admittedly without measuring it) that whatever work mgmt does to
> respond to your query would overwhelm the effort involved in establishing
> an SSL connection.

The overhead we consider is not only on the rabbitmq side but on
the monitoring side too.

> Cheers, Simon
> --
> Simon MacMullen
> RabbitMQ, VMware
> ______________________________**_________________
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.**rabbitmq.com<rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com>
> https://lists.rabbitmq.com/**cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/**rabbitmq-discuss<https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss>

It would be great if it could be in the next release.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20120209/b50a9c3f/attachment.htm>

More information about the rabbitmq-discuss mailing list