Skip to content

Conversation

@MarcialRosales
Copy link
Contributor

@MarcialRosales MarcialRosales commented Oct 29, 2024

Proposed Changes

It fixes an issue caused when the mqtt.ssl_cert_client_id_san_type was renamed in the schema to 'mqtt.ssl_cert_login_san_type` to keep it consistent with how the username is determined. But one part of the code was not updated accordingly.

Adding a selenium end-2-end test so that this kind of issues are spotted earlier.

References #12595.

Types of Changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to this project?
Put an x in the boxes that apply

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes issue Cannot set mqtt.ssl_cert_client_id_san_type and san_index #12595)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause an observable behavior change in existing systems)
  • Documentation improvements (corrections, new content, etc)
  • Cosmetic change (whitespace, formatting, etc)
  • Build system and/or CI

@MarcialRosales MarcialRosales self-assigned this Oct 29, 2024
@mergify mergify bot added the bazel label Oct 29, 2024
@MarcialRosales MarcialRosales force-pushed the mqtt-fix-ssl-variable-name branch from dcfbd23 to e7cb242 Compare October 29, 2024 15:41
@michaelklishin michaelklishin changed the title Use the correct variable name for TLS SAN type MQTT, x.509 certificate-based authentication: use the correct key name for the TLS SAN type configuration parameter Oct 29, 2024
@michaelklishin michaelklishin marked this pull request as ready for review October 30, 2024 15:15
@michaelklishin michaelklishin merged commit 5f6b1cc into main Oct 30, 2024
274 checks passed
@michaelklishin michaelklishin deleted the mqtt-fix-ssl-variable-name branch October 30, 2024 15:16
@michaelklishin michaelklishin added this to the 4.1.0 milestone Oct 30, 2024
michaelklishin added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 30, 2024
MQTT, x.509 certificate-based authentication: use the correct key name for the TLS SAN type configuration parameter (backport #12604)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants