Re: Direct SSL connection and ALPN loose ends

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jacob Champion
Тема Re: Direct SSL connection and ALPN loose ends
Дата
Msg-id CAOYmi+kzVAaRRwxukvcKr1h=xUiHcsXhZS7E_yDtYxFwHST_XQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Direct SSL connection and ALPN loose ends  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
Ответы Re: Direct SSL connection and ALPN loose ends
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 8:24 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
> By "negotiation", which part of the protocol are we talking about
> exactly? In the middle of the TLS handshake? After sending the startup
> packet?

By "negotiation" I mean the server's response to the startup packet.
I.e. "supported"/"not supported"/"error".

> I think the behavior with v2 and v3 errors should be the same. And I
> think an immediate failure is appropriate on any v2/v3 error during
> negotiation, assuming we don't use those errors for things like "TLS not
> supported", which would warrant a fallback.

For GSS encryption, it was my vague understanding that older servers
respond with an error rather than the "not supported" indication. For
TLS, though, the decision in a49fbaaf (immediate failure) seemed
reasonable.

Thanks,
--Jacob



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: RFC: adding pytest as a supported test framework
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Avoid orphaned objects dependencies, take 3