From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::235; helo=mail-lj1-x235.google.com; envelope-from=mine260309@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="LqDoRsOZ"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-lj1-x235.google.com (mail-lj1-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::235]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47sHMk01g6zDqHP for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 14:06:23 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x235.google.com with SMTP id y6so45087538lji.0 for ; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 19:06:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Fb8D33Yhe/oEYihydW6deuwso6dRDuK+ukLAAvg9Sjk=; b=LqDoRsOZRobgnWYDEU0WoVYmScrCaJbOZMvvvueDXuel8z4AoxxQHKBbiF3o4isS5U EhYsdpL3eQuD6kQsJy9VB6UboD8MonuohROqJh0XDAUGWGJcsSTsgDpNS6a6D2n8+C/y VylUwktqqWBsZnbjOx2g6tSeJKQnzwY2MHm4V9v+AWm0jJ7paCJBSF3wmuXwQg1oMCt0 MtsjMXFKIwavvGc2LjO3bElpQjUf0SDAQd3potMMYUQBqTCR16DLNkpEaNCQoQdOYiYp MU/9to15h2tmTKVSmrAKBvOmyLV7v5kTVZ0cJybm/5nDI6ui9/O5KBF9/nsUq7qRvDy0 ethQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Fb8D33Yhe/oEYihydW6deuwso6dRDuK+ukLAAvg9Sjk=; b=PkbefzoczvdN4MkgpssGjaP0tZErlUyfmfrqO5QayaSfrUsiKr0bh0ioH6NmbX8lg/ CzjDbVvodQMVfvtTgFDFDtIXMHtPj0GDxvx6Yrb0QVo+axf/7O2Na8D5LgiXcJavTumx eKeycmebAu2vlhmVUTDO0X3STQdjMN9t2GFGcolulzyd7scij5XHzwLOnm9X4BwrhdbZ 3swzKAjUs+a7MwLMfNaewLLTKiimz5Jqg+vCDmKkHAfXAkMCbwafIOqWy7S479C2fBi+ vqTHdckW2fsWu51XQC0biR5VvE+X2HI9vyTiaBROzUe5N5f5NBH7kiEUXyVZNXEO0aHm gV/A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXh1vrh3B5EG9w9qZhMXqeSuHJqwU+jvOa4t2yEazoQ5BK4i6gz cTY3dwigUtuzf8D3ntPsmwugqEI2H3qICJ7VACM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwPkznDZja/VXnnAEGryjgZK3jx+3jb+T5vqotx9/CN+UOEYjLOP9WMqZS8/OqXRSg6PwjyVv07V2k1ZH6MRuI= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a486:: with SMTP id h6mr49740735lji.235.1578366377717; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 19:06:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1B3B2725-9C0F-4829-82BE-7FB35C558AB5@fuzziesquirrel.com> In-Reply-To: <1B3B2725-9C0F-4829-82BE-7FB35C558AB5@fuzziesquirrel.com> From: Lei YU Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2020 11:06:07 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: HTTP redirect to HTTPS for web UI To: Brad Bishop Cc: George Liu , OpenBMC Maillist Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2020 03:06:26 -0000 On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 11:20 PM Brad Bishop w= rote: > > > > > On Oct 31, 2019, at 9:45 AM, George Liu wrote: > > > > Hi All: > > I'm working on http redirect to https task(https://github.com/ibm-openb= mc/dev/issues/895). > > I took a cursory look at the design(https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/= c/openbmc/docs/+/24173) and did some testing. > > > > In bmcweb, I find it the current communication logic can only listen to= one communication protocol (http or https). If you listen to both protocol= s at the same time, you need to change a lot of code and communication logi= c. > > If we are going to implement this feature in bmcweb, it costs extra eff= ort and it's likely the implementation is no better than Nginx. so I prefer= to use Nginx. > > > > Please everyone stay here to discuss and leave your comments. > > > > Thanks! > > Hi George > > I see you implemented this here: > > https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/meta-openpower/+/28099 > > I=E2=80=99d like to propose this go in meta-phosphor and not meta-openpow= er. Does anyone have thoughts on whether or not this should be enabled or = disabled by default? As I remember we had some discussion in the mailing list, and Intel indicated that it's not a wanted feature. But it does make sense to put the recipe into meta-phosphor, and one could enable it in some company or machine layer.