On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 6:37 AM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <a...@8kdata.com> wrote: > By looking at the them, and unless I'm missing something, I don't see > how the extra information for the future implementation of channel binding > would be added (without changing the protocol). Relevant part is: > > The message body is a list of SASL authentication mechanisms, in the > server's order of preference. A zero byte is required as terminator after > the last authentication mechanism name. For each mechanism, there is the > following: > <variablelist> > <varlistentry> > <term> > String > </term> > <listitem> > <para> > Name of a SASL authentication mechanism. > </para> > </listitem> > </varlistentry> > </variablelist> > How do you plan to implement it, in future versions, without modifying > the AuthenticationSASL message? Or is it OK to add new fields to a message > in future PostgreSQL versions, without considering that a protocol change?
I don't quite understand the complain here, it is perfectly fine to add as many null-terminated names as you want with this model. The patches would make the server just send one mechanism name now, but nothing prevents the addition of more. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers