>>24
That makes perfect sense. I hadn't even considered that it wouldn't have any way to process SSL/TLS. I guess this is what happens when I merely look for the source of an error without putting any thought into why the error occurs. I'd gotten too used to thinking of HTTPS as being "that encryption that gets done for you when you add an `s' to your link and use port 443".
Well, I've got some things to rethink, but I'll check out bindings for both of those before I get back to working on this.