Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lCdfx-0005Fk-Sk for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:24:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lCdfw-0000Rz-Ng for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:24:36 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lCdfw-0000Rp-Ga for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:24:36 +0000 Received: from wforward2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.31]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lCdfo-000560-Ti for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:24:35 +0000 Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailforward.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D42CEAD8; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:24:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:24:27 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=uJEJXPThr/qRlmY3qZDdNr70ZKMFvrULFHnzdc8a9 E4=; b=aCWfxIPcdetOwp0J0nUrPCacIDHsThzsp3qBzqSXnv3DUnlkuuLqxV3f8 DT1tWjwhaTrEofQjO2zcmWjiFdWI1mmfRzD+O/smr2dkeOUYGQpV35wTV8i8sviS 1oTvdngp7MHc2Gvglm0egXPqVS4aWuKnKV50odzFXeKu3FNNfbzXUeVzdNRJSte4 XYgkrLPPcgr0SjrfQIa9pXBYWS7sbXSCjSY1pkk0er2zQMRlM+9EAuT4R5bGfP4x del7aZgWhJdALHzF8dTRZGpJobqCkarYJQnoAGaaBvLPAdhROO/AnzyJM93x7PQl F6KDxcyTd7wXdZ3DHg0XWxfyQqp5w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrjeefgddutdejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhfhokffffgggjggtgfesth ejredttdefheenucfhrhhomheprfgvthgvrhcugfhishgvnhhtrhgruhhtuceophgvthgv rhdrvghishgvnhhtrhgruhhtsegvnhhtvghrphhrihhsvggusgdrtghomheqnecuggftrf grthhtvghrnhepffdvueeftdfggfevffdvheejkeejkeehvddvueehgefhffelvdfgffff ffefjedunecukfhppeekjedrudejjedrieelrddugedtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgvrhdrvghishgvnhhtrhgruhht segvnhhtvghrphhrihhsvggusgdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from april.pezone.net (p57b1458c.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.177.69.140]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 23793240062; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 02:24:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Is it worth accepting multiple CRLs? To: Kyotaro Horiguchi References: <20210119.173200.1687041891704633506.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> <516cf19c-840b-3db6-3320-4145d49c24d8@enterprisedb.com> <20210201.114232.1425888258279369778.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> <20210217.130526.621475320443052460.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> Cc: sfrost@snowman.net, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org From: Peter Eisentraut Organization: EnterpriseDB Message-ID: <554b446f-a210-cadc-24a1-079d88872468@enterprisedb.com> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:24:23 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210217.130526.621475320443052460.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On 2021-02-17 05:05, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote: > The commit fe61df7f82 shot down this. > > This patch allows a new GUC ssl_crl_dir and a new libpq connection > option sslcrldir to specify CRL directory, which stores multiple files > that contains one CRL. With that method server loads only CRLs for the > CA of the certificate being validated. > > Along with rebasing, the documentation is slightly reworded. Committed this. I changed the documentation a bit. Instead of having a separate section describing the CRL options, I put that information directly into the libpq and GUC sections. Some of the information, such as that the directory files are loaded on demand, isn't so obviously useful in the libpq case, so I found that a bit confusing. Also, I got the impression that the hashed directory format is sort of internal to OpenSSL, and there are several versions of that format, so I didn't want to copy over the description of these internals. Instead, I referred to the openssl rehash/c_rehash commands for information. If we get support for non-OpenSSL providers, we'll probably have to revisit this.