Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

2.0.0-M13 Released. #827

Closed
boaks opened this issue Dec 17, 2018 · 9 comments
Closed

2.0.0-M13 Released. #827

boaks opened this issue Dec 17, 2018 · 9 comments

Comments

@boaks
Copy link
Contributor

boaks commented Dec 17, 2018

Though a lot of small issues have been fixed and the question, when the M13 will be release, was already raised (see #810 (comment)), I started to think about a M13 release.

Proposal:

The implementation of the <a https://github.com/tlswg/dtls-conn-id/blob/master/draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id.md>draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id showed first successful message exchanges, but also, that the changes/redesigns are too large to be released soon.

Any opinions?
Additional issues, which should be fixed for M13?

@boaks
Copy link
Contributor Author

boaks commented Dec 27, 2018

I add PR #835 and #836 to M13.

That are the fixes for findings during my work on the connection id #824

@sbernard31
Copy link
Contributor

I looked quickly PRs above. That's sounds good to me.
We could maybe fix #834 for M13 ?
I'm ok about not adding 'connection id' for now.

@boaks
Copy link
Contributor Author

boaks commented Jan 7, 2019

We could maybe fix #834 for M13 ?

Sure.
Today I found also a unit test issue of java 11 with TLS (it now uses TLSv1.3, which breaks a unit test). I have already the fix, but I would like to improve it a little more.

@boaks
Copy link
Contributor Author

boaks commented Jan 17, 2019

I'm done with PR #829 .
If noone has an objection, I will merge it on Monday and start the M13 release.

@boaks
Copy link
Contributor Author

boaks commented Jan 21, 2019

Released!

@boaks boaks changed the title Scheduling for 2.0.0-M13 2.0.0-M13 Released. Jan 21, 2019
@boaks boaks removed this from the 2.0.0-M13 milestone Jan 21, 2019
@sbernard31
Copy link
Contributor

sbernard31 commented Jan 24, 2019

I started to integrate it in Leshan (eclipse-leshan/leshan#644)

Some feedbacks :

  1. In DtlsConnectorConfig, getTrustStore is deprecated but there is no alternative proposed:
/**
 * Gets the trusted root certificates to use when verifying
 * a peer's certificate during authentication.
 * 
 * @return the root certificates
 */
@Deprecated
public X509Certificate[] getTrustStore() {

In Leshan, we are using it but maybe for overkill check ..

  1. create an coapServer and destroy it without started it before raise an NPE :
java.lang.NullPointerException
	at org.eclipse.californium.core.CoapServer.destroy(CoapServer.java:291)
	at org.eclipse.leshan.client.californium.impl.CaliforniumEndpointsManager.destroy(CaliforniumEndpointsManager.java:256)
	at org.eclipse.leshan.client.californium.LeshanClient.destroy(LeshanClient.java:139)
	at org.eclipse.leshan.integration.tests.RegistrationTest.stop(RegistrationTest.java:71)

I agree this is an unusual use case but I think it can make sense.

  1. The API changes in DtlsConnectorConfig about CertificateType are great. 👍

@boaks
Copy link
Contributor Author

boaks commented Jan 24, 2019

For 1.
Though the "trust" is now implemented with a CertificateVerifier, I'm not sure, if the getter makes sense, at least not, if a custom CertificateVerifier is used. But with changed javadoc, we can undeprecate it :-).

@boaks
Copy link
Contributor Author

boaks commented Jan 24, 2019

For 2.
Will be fixed in M14 :-).

@boaks
Copy link
Contributor Author

boaks commented Jan 24, 2019

  1. done, 2 see PR Remove deprecated from trust store. #856

@boaks boaks pinned this issue Jan 26, 2019
@boaks boaks unpinned this issue Mar 1, 2019
@boaks boaks closed this as completed Mar 2, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants