> Am 01.11.2021 um 15:24 schrieb Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com>:
> 
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 01:35:09PM +0100, ste...@eissing.org wrote:
>> I would like us to come to an understanding what our roadmap in
>> regard to OpenSSL 3.0 is. People keep on asking about it.
>> 
>> Yesterday, I spent some hours hacking at mod_ssl and mod_md to
>> get it running. I managed to compile it, but it was not working
>> reliably. Maybe I took some wrong turns somewhere. My observations
>> below.
> 
> What are you talking about exactly here?  trunk should compile and run 
> fine already with 3.0 except if you build OpenSSL without deprecated 
> functions which AFAIK nobody sane will do, or at least, no sane 
> distributor will do, because the world is not ready.

I was trying to make it work without deprecated functions. Sorry,
to have not been more clear. If we regard 3.0 conformance including
those, then this is a non-issue, aside from actually testing that
it still works.

>> With my RM hat on, I see the next release in early December. We 
>> have some fixes to ship and maybe the new http2 implementation.
>> 
>> Personally, I do not see a need for OpenSSL 3.0 in that one. But
>> if anyone has plans to do it, it would be good to know.
> 
> I would still like to get a Travis job testing against 3.0, on my TODO, 
> but I don't know of any compatilibity problems not covered in trunk / 
> https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/258 (outside use of deprecated 
> functions anyway).
> 
> Regards, Joe
> 
> 
>> 
>> Kind Regards,
>> Stefan
>> 
>> ---------------
>> Observations hacking on OpenSSL 3.0 compatibility:
>> 
>> - SRP seems to be gone.
>> - the ENGINE API seems to be gone
>> - RSA*, DH* and friends are no longer wanted.
>>  Instead, the PKEY API offers replacements.
>> - This affects reading key parameter from files, afaict.
>> - Some minor annoyances with BIO_set_callback and
>>  ERR_peek_last..
>> - I changed EC key generation in mod_md to the new API,
>>  but generation failed at runtime. Maybe a minor glitch
>>  on my part.
>> - The code overall does not become prettier.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to