From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: sfrost@snowman.net
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Is it worth accepting multiple CRLs?
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 09:01:35 +0100
Message-ID: <e5538639-c232-e631-c533-aa6449b8ba09@enterprisedb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210119.091734.2050908166228453830.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
References: <20200818.164347.563741043271525282.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
<20200831.180302.1762036380359974457.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
<591fd449-f475-c2f1-0606-b2a47887c23f@enterprisedb.com>
<20210119.091734.2050908166228453830.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
On 2021-01-19 01:17, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Thank you for the information. The only reason for sharing the same
> variable for both file and directory is to avoid additional variable
> only for this reason. I'll post a new version where new GUC
> ssl_crl_path is added.
Okay, I look forward to that patch.
> By the way we can do the same thing on CA file/dir, but I personally
> think that the benefit from the specify-by-directory for CA files is
> far less than CRL files. So I'm not going to do this for CA files for
> now.
Yeah, that seems not so commonly used.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com, horikyota.ntt@gmail.com, sfrost@snowman.net
Subject: Re: Is it worth accepting multiple CRLs?
In-Reply-To: <e5538639-c232-e631-c533-aa6449b8ba09@enterprisedb.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox