Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER

From: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER
Date: 2025-03-17 15:08:30
Message-ID: CAOYmi+kKjhOnwU1LmDksf6RSZtVe9QXnH+6HDuiR=Cv9Z+MnFw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 4:37 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I just wanted to report that the 'oauth_validator/t/001_server.pl'
> test failed on FreeBSD in one of my local CI runs [1]. I looked at the
> thread but could not find the same error report; if this is already
> known, please excuse me.

Thanks for the report! Yes, this looks like the issue that NetBSD was having:

> [11:09:56.548] # [libcurl] * Trying [::1]:39251...
> [11:09:56.548] # [libcurl] * Connected to localhost (::1) port 39251

Curl should not have connected to ::1 (the test server isn't listening
on IPv6). Whatever is talking on that port doesn't understand HTTP,
and we later fail with the "HTTP/0.9" error -- a slightly confusing
way to describe a protocol violation.

0001 will fix that. I think we should get that and 0002 in, ASAP. (And
the others.) Thomas has shown me a side quest to get rid of the second
kqueue instance, but so far that is not bearing fruit and we shouldn't
wait on it.

Thanks again!
--Jacob

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David G. Johnston 2025-03-17 15:09:12 Re: Forbid to DROP temp tables of other sessions
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2025-03-17 14:32:55 PG 18 major release notes