pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] Secure sockets builds have high daemon memory utilisation

To: Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] Secure sockets builds have high daemon memory utilisation
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 22:45:26 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5405F715.4050303@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1896810420.23212457.1402370819966.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <53EBCCEB.2030604@xxxxxxxxxx> <1306085089.30466668.1408001833620.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <53F245A1.2070003@xxxxxxxxxx> <1131406976.33656824.1408432815577.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <53F3A80F.6010204@xxxxxxxxxx> <1340890868.34561257.1408489421876.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <5405F715.4050303@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: cfah4WqH4ihaqDjjFEfLaDLjYxy71g==
Thread-topic: Secure sockets builds have high daemon memory utilisation
Hi Dave,

----- Original Message -----
> [..]
> OK. The commit below (brolley/dev in pcpfans) is an implementation of
> this. When supported by both the client and the server, an error pdu is
> sent from the server to the client during the secure connection
> handshake which indicates whether the server is able to honour the
> client's request for a secure connection. If either the client or server
> does not support this then this part of the handshake is neither
> expected nor performed.

Cool, nicely done - I'm glad that worked out.  I did a few up/down rev
client/server tests with my local boxen, everything looks good to me.

> Passes qa qith no regressions. Also tested with old clients and new
> servers and vice versa. pmproxy has also be tested under these conditions.

I came across one failure in qa/145 - simple fix committed, along with a
couple of trivial comments/copyright notice updates.

cheers.

--
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>