On 14/11/16 14:18, Ulf Lilleengen wrote:
I've been playing around with setting Server Name Indication (SNI)
when using the qpid proton python bindings.
For configuring SSL, it seems to be expected that configuration
parameters come from a SSLDomain python object, which maps to the
underlying pn_ssl_domain_t in proton-c.
Today, setting SNI is done through the pn_ssl_t instance using
'pn_ssl_set_peer_hostname'. The pn_ssl_t instance does not seem to be
exposed in the end APIs in the same way as pn_ssl_domain_t, at least
not in the python bindings. I tried to work around this in the python
bindings by passing an extra parameter in addition to the ssl_domain
instance on connect(), but it didn't seem like a good approach.
There is already a virtual_host keyword argument for connect(). This is
used to control the hostname field in the AMQP open frame. That is
similar to SNI in TLS. The AMQP spec says:
The TLS client peer SHOULD use the server name indication
extension as described in RFC-4366 [RFC4366].
If it does so, then it is undefined what happens if this
differs from hostname in the sasl-init and open frame
frames.
So perhaps using the virtual_host, if specified, for the peer_hostname
would make sense. (If not specified it could fallback to the hostname in
the url).
Would it make sense to add the peer_hostname attribute to the
pn_ssl_domain_t instance, and use that when configuring the pn_ssl_t
internally (in addition to keeping todays API)?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
