On Sep 24, 2014, at 8:40 AM, Susan Hinrichs <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> Noticed something in the RHEL5 build while tracking down build errors.   For 
> RHEL5 master build TS_USE_TLS_SNI is not defined which means the function 
> SSL_CTX_set_tlsext_servername_callback is not set in the version of openssl 
> used by RHEL5.  This means that SSL certificate support in 5.x will not work 
> on RHEL5 because only the default cert is loaded initially.  The real certs 
> are applied in the SNI callback (which will not get called).
> 
> Actually looking more closely at the RHEL5 build output we see
> 
> checking for SSL_CTX_set_tlsext_servername_callback... yes
> checking for SSL_get_servername... no
> checking whether to enable ServerNameIndication TLS extension support... no
> 
> 
> Which to me means that the SNI callback logic is present, but the accessor 
> method to get the name later is not present.  If we really needed to support 
> certificates in RHEL5, we could work around that.

Yikes, that seems like a pretty bad bug. 

> 
> On 9/21/2014 7:33 PM, Brian Geffon wrote:
>> Ok, so I just found this in SSLUtils.cc:
>> 
>> #if (OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER < 0x00090400L)# error Traffic Server requires
>> an OpenSSL library version 0.9.4 or greater
>> 
>> #endif
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 5:31 PM, James Peach <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sep 21, 2014, at 5:23 PM, Brian Geffon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> 
>>>> This is something that apparently has never been brought up, we don't
>>> have
>>>> a strict OpenSSL minimum version. By explicitly stating our minimum
>>>> supported OpenSSL version we can clean up our SSL code, specifically
>>> around
>>>> the SNI #ifdefs. I'm going to propose that we make *0.9.8f* our minimum
>>>> supported version. This was the first version to support SNI and was
>>>> released in late 2007 (around 7 years ago). It seems like a good place to
>>>> start. Thoughts?
>>> +1, provided the configure script checks for it, and we document it :)
>>> 
>>> J
>>> 
> 

Reply via email to