Bruce Merry <bme...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> It seems like we could have support for OpenSSL 1.1.1 at that level with a > compile time fallback for previous OpenSSL versions that break up the work. > Would hope this solution also yields something we can backport more easily I'd have to look at exactly how the SSL_read API works, but I think once we're in C land and can read into regions of a buffer, reading in 2GB chunks is unlikely to cause a performance hit (unlike the original bpo-36050, where Python had to read a bunch of separate buffers then join them together). So trying to have 3.9 support both SSL_read_ex AND have a fallback sounds like it's adding complexity and risking inconsistency if the fallback doesn't perfectly mimic the SSL_read_ex path, for very little gain. If no-one else steps up sooner I can probably work on a patch, but before sinking time into it I'd like to hear if there is agreement that this is a reasonable approach and ideally have a volunteer to review it (hopefully someone who is familiar with OpenSSL, since I've only briefly dealt with it years ago and crypto isn't somewhere you want to make mistakes). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue42853> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
