From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | dvs(at)arrakis(dot)es |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Old backend/frontend protocol versions |
Date: | 2001-10-29 17:59:48 |
Message-ID: | 10573.1004378388@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Daniel Varela Santoalla <dvs(at)arrakis(dot)es> writes:
> The problem appeared when using DBBalancer with PostgreSQL and PHP installed
> from Debian packages, as a tcpdump capture identified a StartUp packet like
> this:
> 00 00 01 28 04 d2 16 2f ...
> According to the protocol specification the first four bytes are the length
> of the packet (ok), but the next four should be the protocol version....
This is an SSL negotiation request --- look for NEGOTIATE_SSL_CODE
in the sources.
> What I would like to know, since the lack of documentation (at least I
> couldn't find any) of previous versions of the protocol is:
The people who did the SSL feature did a spectacularly poor job of
documenting it. AFAICT, the rest of that packet is a wasted bunch of
zeroes, and the next thing that happens is that the postmaster sends
back a one-byte OK-to-use-SSL-or-not response; if OK, the next step
is to engage in an SSL connection dialog, then send the real StartUp
packet under protection of SSL. But no, there's not a word of
documentation about it except some comments in the source code.
Unless your balancer can cope with a stream of data that it cannot make
any sense of, my guess is that you'll have a hard time doing anything
useful with SSL-encrypted connections. You might be best off to reject
them out of hand (send back a 1-byte response 'N', then wait for the
non-encrypted StartUpPacket). Or perhaps run separate SSL sessions on
your incoming and outgoing datastreams.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-10-29 18:19:37 | Re: Regression error on unixware 7 and open unix 8 |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-10-29 17:44:09 | Re: ecpg - GRANT bug |