From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EB2178D41
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:51:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3C12B2E9AF
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:50:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:50:46 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 56DA043D83;
 Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:50:46 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <14c7b0c7-f379-6a97-6e4a-21e103690b40@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:50:45 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.0
Content-Language: en-US
From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Dietmar Maurer <dietmar@proxmox.com>
Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <212652737.3945.1656586923044@webmail.proxmox.com>
 <725dbe83-2a4c-7eab-a053-3f87f2be5f51@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <725dbe83-2a4c-7eab-a053-3f87f2be5f51@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.100 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [wsproxy.py, qemu.pm]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] vncpropxy question
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 11:51:17 -0000

On 6/30/22 13:25, Dominik Csapak wrote:
> On 6/30/22 13:02, Dietmar Maurer wrote:
>> in qemu-server, I wonder why we set $ENV{LC_PVE_TICKET} conditionally? Does not make any sense to 
>> me, because it make all other connection failing...
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm
>> index 99b426e..c6a3ac1 100644
>> --- a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm
>> +++ b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm
>> @@ -2102,7 +2102,7 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({
>>              } else {
>> -               $ENV{LC_PVE_TICKET} = $password if $websocket; # set ticket with "qm vncproxy"
>> +               $ENV{LC_PVE_TICKET} = $password;
>>                  $cmd = [@$remcmd, "/usr/sbin/qm", 'vncproxy', $vmid];
>>
>>
> 
> AFAICS, this is a remnant of old code where we would start wsproxy.py instead of our
>   'qm vncproxy'
> 
> i think we could remove the whole websocket parameter as it doesn't
> do anything here
> 
> so we could do
> 1. remove the use of $websocket here
> 2. remove the websocket=1 parameter in novnc
> 3. remove the websocket parameter completely (in 8.0, since it's a breaking api change)
> 

addendum:

'it doesn't do anything here' is not completely correct
for 'regular' vm displays it just does not set the ticket which
breaks the connection

for use with a serial terminal in the vm, we also
set '-notls' and '-listen localhost' for vncterm

if we'd drop the parameter anyway (with 8.0) and use always
'-notls -listen localhost' i think we could drop the custom
libvncserver package in vncterm and use the debian packaged
one (since we'd never use tls then anyway)

we could even go a step further and remove support for terminals
over vnc completely, since we have support for that in the
browser with xterm.js since quite some time