If we're including and excluding paths, it seems like it might make sense to allow for the configuration of multiple filters.
We could do this with a pattern similar to how Kafka listeners are configured. Something like: response.http.header.filters = myfilter1,myfilter2 response.http.header.myfilter1.included.paths = ... response.http.header.myfilter1.included.mime.types = ... response.http.header.myfilter1.config = set X-Frame-Options: DENY,"add Cache-Control: no-cache, no-store, must-revalidate", ... response.http.header.myfilter2.included.paths = ... response.http.header.myfilter2.included.mime.types = ... response.http.header.myfilter2.config = setDate Expires: 31540000000 ... But before we go down that road: are people going to want to be able to set multiple different header filters? Or is one header filter for all of the responses good enough? On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:56 AM Jeff Huang <jeff.hu...@confluent.io> wrote: > > Hi Aneel, > > That is really great point. I will update KIP. We need add following > properties combining with header configs: > includedPaths - CSV of path specs to include > excludedPaths - CSV of path specs to exclude > includedMimeTypes - CSV of mime types to include > excludedMimeTypes - CSV of mime types to exclude > includedHttpMethods - CSV of http methods to include > excludedHttpMethods - CSV of http methods to exclude > > Jeff. > > On 2020/03/13 14:28:11, Aneel Nazareth <an...@confluent.io> wrote: > > Hi Jeff, > > > > Thanks for the KIP. > > > > Will users always want to set identical headers on all responses? Does > > it make sense to also allow configuration of the HeaderFilter init > > parameters like "includedPaths", "excludedHttpMethods", etc.? Does it > > make sense to allow multiple configurations (so that eg. different > > paths have different headers?) > > > > Cheers, > > Aneel > > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 7:05 PM Zhiguo Huang <jeff.hu...@confluent.io> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >
