Re: SSL SNI

From: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SSL SNI
Date: 2021-02-26 22:27:42
Message-ID: CAM-w4HNN4uZuBEmehbmzgFPVZw=cdGnoLxMX4x87vy=a-GB_mg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Do you mean the IPv6 detection code is not correct? What is the problem?

This bit, will recognize ipv4 addresses but not ipv6 addresses:

+ /*
+ * Set Server Name Indication (SNI), but not if it's a literal IP address.
+ * (RFC 6066)
+ */
+ if (!(strspn(conn->pghost, "0123456789.") == strlen(conn->pghost) ||
+ strchr(conn->pghost, ':')))
+ {

In response to

  • Re: SSL SNI at 2021-02-26 07:05:12 from Peter Eisentraut

Responses

  • Re: SSL SNI at 2021-03-18 08:31:24 from Peter Eisentraut

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2021-02-26 23:10:23 Remove latch.c workaround for Linux < 2.6.27
Previous Message Paul Martinez 2021-02-26 21:16:31 Re: [PATCH] Note effect of max_replication_slots on subscriber side in documentation.