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

Always pass server_hostname to wrap_socket #2176

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 10, 2021

Conversation

pquentin
Copy link
Member

Since Python 3.5, wrap_socket always allows a server_hostname to bepassed, even if OpenSSL does not have SNI. This is how our pyOpenSSL and SecureTransport backends work too.

Since Python 3.5, wrap_socket always allow a server_hostname to be
passed, even if OpenSSL does not have SNI. This is how our pyOpenSSL and
SecureTransport backends work too.
@pquentin pquentin force-pushed the server-hostname-exists branch from 01bda18 to 12e78cf Compare March 10, 2021 08:52
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 10, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #2176 (32c3ffd) into main (6d799ce) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2176      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   99.86%   99.86%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          26       26              
  Lines        2256     2253       -3     
==========================================
- Hits         2253     2250       -3     
  Misses          3        3              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/urllib3/connectionpool.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/urllib3/util/ssl_.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6d799ce...12e78cf. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

@sethmlarson sethmlarson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, this is a great simplification!

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants