From: Robbie Harwood <rharwood@redhat.com>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>,
 PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] GSSAPI encryption support
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAMkU=1y9Dj8nrhOizsE860JcqrWErq_aTJ-Z_qpmXxAJDu8Byw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <jlg1tgq1ktm.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
 <CAB7nPqRGQ60PWLb-CLLrvMoQwPAbnu-961W+xGPvG62RMSkcZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <jlg37yo7mj2.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
 <CAB7nPqTQM5dfhMh6yskkt=w1032iJ8ggnJu9y+tZBmwwhzEZKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <jlgsi6n8rum.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
 <CAB7nPqQ7daftDPRTxvyPBFLmZnX-0vTku+H1ft7tqNmSxca3BA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB7nPqTgr+aOZFmbORwxX9sZ7f3re4FuQFZyqdHP8AnOZPqrgw@mail.gmail.com>
 <jlgvbba5fu4.fsf@thriss.redhat.com> <jlgsi5xb7kk.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
 <CAMkU=1y9Dj8nrhOizsE860JcqrWErq_aTJ-Z_qpmXxAJDu8Byw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.4.1
 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 13:41:03 -0400
Message-ID: <jlg7fm6zya8.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
 micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain

Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> writes:

> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Robbie Harwood <rharwood@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Robbie Harwood <rharwood@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>>>>> Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, the issue is still here: login through gssapi fails with
>>>>>>> your patch, not with HEAD. This patch is next on my review list by
>>>>>>> the way so I'll see what I can do about it soon even if I am in
>>>>>>> the US for Postgres Open next week. Still, how did you test it? I
>>>>>>> am just creating by myself a KDC, setting up a valid credential
>>>>>>> with kinit, and after setting up Postgres for this purpose the
>>>>>>> protocol communication just fails.
>>>
>>> I have no issues, no sync loss; nothing is amiss as far as I can see.
>>> If there is actually a problem here, I need more information from you.
>>> At the very least, as previously mentioned, I need to know what
>>> messages went over the wire to/from the server before it occurred, and
>>> what command (if it it made it to command processing) it was in the
>>> midst of sending.
>>
>> Any follow-up on this?  I'd really like my code to be bug-free.
>
> I don't know if this is worth posting as the patch is currently
> returned with feedback and you are redoing it in a different way, but
> with your patch I get this error when connecting:
>
> lost synchronization with server: got message type "T", length 27
> The connection to the server was lost. Attempting reset: Failed.
>
> I only get the error when connection to a patched server from a
> patched libpq.  If either is unpatched, then there is no problem.
>
> Let me know if this is worth looking into.

Definitely good to know, and I appreciate your testing.  It's probably
not worth looking into right now, but please do test the next version of
the code as well.

Thanks!
--Robbie

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=Lrj9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--