Re: BUG #5559: Full SSL verification fails when hostaddr provided
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #5559: Full SSL verification fails when hostaddr provided |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19143.1279145790@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #5559: Full SSL verification fails when hostaddr provided (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #5559: Full SSL verification fails when
hostaddr provided
Re: BUG #5559: Full SSL verification fails when hostaddr provided |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes: > Perhaps I was being a bit overzealous in my last response, sorry about > that. If the point here is that people who are using hostaddr are in an > environment where DNS is non-functional or actively broken, then yes, > just bombing out would probably be fine. Well, if your environment includes broken DNS then you are clearly going to get nowhere anyway with Kerberos auth, no? The point of hostaddr is *not* to try to avoid that problem. Rather, it's to allow the application to shift the time expense of the forward DNS lookup to some other place than its PQconnect() call. If you've got an app where the cost of PQconnect() is that critical, you're likely going to want to avoid Kerberos auth anyway, so I don't think it's all that important exactly how the two features play together. As the code stands in HEAD, I think everything is nicely self-consistent: host is what we believe the server name is for authentication purposes, and hostaddr is an optional pre-looked-up address corresponding to that. There is nothing in this suggesting that we should be expected to try to generate an authentication name from hostaddr alone. In particular, the fact that Kerberos is capable of trying to do that is at odds with the other three code paths where the server name is needed for authentication. I don't feel any need to expose Kerberos' peculiarity here. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: