At Thu, 6 Jan 2022 00:02:27 +0000, Jacob Champion <pchampion@vmware.com> wrote in
> On Mon, 2022-01-03 at 16:19 +0000, Jacob Champion wrote:
> > On Fri, 2021-12-17 at 15:40 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > >
> > > + inet_net_pton_ipv4(const char *src, u_char *dst)
> > > (calls inet_net_pton_ipv4_internal(src, dst, true))
> > > + inet_pton_ipv4(const char *src, u_char *dst)
> > > (calls inet_net_pton_ipv4_internal(src, dst, false))
> >
> > Sounds good, I will make that change. Thanks for the feedback!
>
> v3 implements a pg_inet_pton(), but for IPv6 instead of IPv4 as
> presented above (since we only need inet_pton() for IPv6 in this case).
> It's split into a separate patch (0003) for ease of review.
0001 looks fine as it is in the almost same shape withinet_net_pton
about PGSQL_AF_INET and PGSQL_AF_INET6. I'm not sure about the
difference on how to handle AF_INET6 between pg_inet_net_pton and ntop
but that's not a matter of this patch.
However, 0002,
+/*
+ * In a frontend build, we can't include inet.h, but we still need to have
+ * sensible definitions of these two constants. Note that pg_inet_net_ntop()
+ * assumes that PGSQL_AF_INET is equal to AF_INET.
+ */
+#define PGSQL_AF_INET (AF_INET + 0)
+#define PGSQL_AF_INET6 (AF_INET + 1)
+
Now we have the same definition thrice in frontend code. Coulnd't we
define them in, say, libpq-fe.h or inet-fe.h (nonexistent) then
include it from the three files?
+$node->connect_fails(
+ "$common_connstr host=192.0.2.2",
+ "host not matching an IPv4 address (Subject Alternative Name 1)",
It is not the real IP address of the server.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6125
> In some cases, the URI is specified as an IP address rather than a
> hostname. In this case, the iPAddress subjectAltName must be
> present in the certificate and must exactly match the IP in the URI.
When IP address is embedded in URI, it won't be translated to another
IP address. Concretely https://192.0.1.5/hoge cannot reach to the host
192.0.1.8. On the other hand, as done in the test, libpq allows that
when "host=192.0.1.5 hostaddr=192.0.1.8". I can't understand what we
are doing in that case. Don't we need to match the SAN IP address
with hostaddr instead of host?
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center