Added ability to use ResolvesServerCert directly #36
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I was hoping that we could use the rustls |
|
So I checked this out a bit yesterday, apparently rustls needs more contributions to make the I will review this soon! |
This allows specifying the server certificate resolver either via a KeyPair or by using the underlying rustls interface directly. Under the hood, rustls' `with_single_cert` uses `with_cert_resolver` using an internal private type as the resolver. This seemed like the cleanest implementation given how the builder is currently implemented. Also added a rust-toolchain file to ensure local users are running nightly as per Discord.
ecton
force-pushed
the
dynamic-certificate-resolver
branch
from
afeaf2c
to
b3b037c
Compare
|
I just remembered to remove the rust-toolchain file from this commit based on the message in Discord -- that's what the force push was. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Sorry for throwing this idea at you randomly -- happy to refactor if you'd like to see this done in a different way. It just hit me when pondering issues in BonsaiDb that this might be easy to implement -- and sure enough, it was very easy.
This would be a perfect thing for BonsaiDb, as it would completely negate the workaround I did for khonsulabs/bonsaidb#115 -- if I could provide the cert resolver that ACME powers for HTTP, it would support all the features requested in #27. That being said, we may still want to address #27 differently with an easier to use API. But for BonsaiDb, this lower-level feature would be a perfect addition.
What do you think? @daxpedda