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

Persistence #291

Closed
mnot opened this issue Feb 3, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

Persistence #291

mnot opened this issue Feb 3, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

@mnot
Copy link
Member

mnot commented Feb 3, 2017

Dare we specify that clients MAY/SHOULD persist origin information for a given endpoint beyond the lifetime of the connection?

@mcmanus
Copy link
Contributor

mcmanus commented Mar 21, 2017

origin set is defined per connection not (ironically) per origin.. so I'm not sure how this would work.

@mcmanus
Copy link
Contributor

mcmanus commented Mar 21, 2017

2 loadbalanced hosts could have different sets of certs even if they answered to the same SNI on the same (public) IP.. I don't know how you could persist that.

@mnot
Copy link
Member Author

mnot commented Mar 21, 2017

Yeah. I think there are a lot of ways we could mess up here.

If you think of the binding as between a set of origins and a connection, AIUI what's being posited here is that it might be interesting to re-attach that binding to a new connection.

It might be interesting if the server could associate a token with a particular set, and then have a dance where its use can be explicitly negotiated. Question is whether it's worth the effort (we've already tried to over-engineer this thing a few times).

@enygren
Copy link
Contributor

enygren commented Mar 31, 2017

Agreed that persisting across connections seems like it may add too much risk and complexity and further additional interactions, especially if we include hosts not found through the DNS. (And doesn't even make sense with some of the changes made to not always rely on DNS.)

@mnot
Copy link
Member Author

mnot commented Apr 19, 2017

Seems like there's no support for this ATM, closing. Comment if you disagree.

@mnot mnot closed this as completed Apr 19, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants