Hello Maxim, > As previously noted, the patch description is wrong. It also > make sense to add some description of the directive added.
Yeah, will do. > This makes the directive unavailable without any meaningfull > diagnostics if nginx was build with old OpenSSL, which isn't very > user-friendly. I'll fix that, it makes sense to be a bit more user-friendly :) > But actually I doubt we at all need an explicit mark for default > key. Just using first one for encryption would probably be good > enough. I tend to think that being overly explicit isn't always a bad thing. In this particular case, users would need to know that the first key on the list is "active/default" while the rest of them is just old keys, which is an implementation detail and might not be obvious to everybody. > I also think it would be better to don't rely on an explicitly > written name, which will make automatic key rotation a pain - as > one will have to update both name in a configuration file and a > file with keys. E.g. Apache uses a binary file with 48 bytes of > random data, which is much easier to generate and rotate if > needed. The reason why I went with the key name in nginx.conf is because it allows users to use a naming scheme for the keys (ex. YYYYMMDDHH, if you rotate keys hourly, etc.) instead of random and meaningless names. Having said that, I don't mind pushing key name back to the file. > Not sure if this code should be here. Other file operations are > handled in the ngx_event_openssl.c, and doing the same for session > tickets might be a good idea as well. Especially if you'll > consider adding relevant directives to the mail module. Sure, sounds reasonable. I'll send updated patch in a few days. Best regards, Piotr Sikora _______________________________________________ nginx-devel mailing list nginx-devel@nginx.org http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel
