I've been asked to take a look at this thread and review some patches,
and the subject looks interesting enough, so here I am.
On Thu, 19 Jan 2023 at 04:16, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> wrote:
> I had a conversation a while back with Heikki where he expressed that
> it was annoying that we negotiate SSL/TLS the way we do since it
> introduces an extra round trip. Aside from the performance
> optimization I think accepting standard TLS connections would open the
> door to a number of other opportunities that would be worth it on
> their own.
I agree that this would be very nice.
> Other things it would open the door to in order from least
> controversial to most....
>
> * Hiding Postgres behind a standard SSL proxy terminating SSL without
> implementing the Postgres protocol.
I think there is also the option "hiding Postgres behind a standard
SNI-based SSL router that does not terminate SSL", as that's arguably
a more secure way to deploy any SSL service than SSL-terminating
proxies.
> * "Service Mesh" type tools that hide multiple services behind a
> single host/port ("Service Mesh" is just a new buzzword for "proxy").
People proxying PostgreSQL seems fine, and enabling better proxying
seems reasonable.
> * Browser-based protocol implementations using websockets for things
> like pgadmin or other tools to connect directly to postgres using
> Postgres wire protocol but using native SSL implementations.
>
> * Postgres could even implement an HTTP based version of its protocol
> and enable things like queries or browser based tools using straight
> up HTTP requests so they don't need to use websockets.
>
> * Postgres could implement other protocols to serve up data like
> status queries or monitoring metrics, using HTTP based standard
> protocols instead of using our own protocol.
I don't think we should be trying to serve anything HTTP-like, even
with a ten-foot pole, on a port that we serve the PostgreSQL wire
protocol on.
If someone wants to multiplex the PostgreSQL wire protocol on the same
port that serves HTTPS traffic, they're welcome to do so with their
own proxy, but I'd rather we keep the PostgreSQL server's socket
handling fundamentaly incapable of servicng protocols primarily used
in web browsers on the same socket that handles normal psql data
connections.
PostgreSQL may have its own host-based authentication with HBA, but
I'd rather not have to depend on it to filter incoming connections
between valid psql connections and people trying to grab the latest
monitoring statistics at some http endpoint - I'd rather use my trusty
firewall that can already limit access to specific ports very
efficiently without causing undue load on the database server.
Matthias van de Meent
Neon (https://neon.tech)
