Github user oknet commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/642#issuecomment-219613493
@SolidWallOfCode Let me explain it. In the Client<-->ATS side, client_addr
is Client IP Address and server_addr is ATS service IP Address. In the other
side ( ATS <
Github user masaori335 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/632#issuecomment-219591587
The new commit passed the build tests on the CI
- https://ci.trafficserver.apache.org/view/github/job/Github-Linux/80/
- https://ci.trafficserver.ap
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219586815
Ok, well I assume @pbchou can take it from here?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well.
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219586583
The missing ``optarg = NULL`` is just my fat fingers :)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as w
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219586100
Missing the `optarg = NULL` in the global case on purpose?
Also, I think we do want that `ifdef` around the `optind`. And I looked it
up, we need to inc
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/638#issuecomment-219581568
@shinrich , according to @calavera 's git bisect it's this commit:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/commit/af76977adb9f3c0296a232688bbcb5a1421a6768,
we're se
Github user calavera commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/638#issuecomment-219578773
No, we've seen it without SSL enabled too.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If you
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219573746
* ``getopt_long`` is implemented on all the platforms we support.
* ``:`` means the option takes an argument; it is not a GNU extension
Here's what we s
Github user pbchou commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219565721
When there is an issue, typically the second plugin in the list will have
corrupted values for its arguments as returned by getopt_long(). For example,
it might re
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219565432
Heh, and so we are full circle. @jpeach Exactly, and that's what @pbchou
said in an earlier post. To which I raised the concern about changing it to 0
(as the patch
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219553317
Can you please explain "do not play well together"? The `:` makes that
option required I think. Also, most if not all of these plugins are
developed/tested/depl
Github user pbchou commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219549881
I think this depends on whether GNU extensions are being used or not since
the man page does say that you "must" reinitialize with optind = 0 if you go
back and fo
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219535666
``0`` is a GNU extension behaviour, from the [man
page](http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/getopt.3.html):
```
... and wants to make use of GNU extensions
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219529521
But this patch is changing it to 0, which might be Linux only? But we do
use this inconsistently, but then again, many plug-ins might not be tested on
anything but
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/643#issuecomment-219523907
If you don't mind using internal APIs, use ``ats_ip_ntop`` from
``ink_inet.h``.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
re
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219522840
IMHO resetting to 1 is the right fix. It should be safe to reset ``optind``
in ``plugin_load`` and remove all the plugin assumptions, since we guarantee
that plugi
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/642#issuecomment-219515242
Would it be possible to squash some of this commits down ? Or if not, can
you assure that all intermediary stages are functional / compiles ?
---
If your project i
Github user jacksontj closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/631
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the featu
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/643#issuecomment-219507130
Yep, that was the first portion of my reply :).
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user yatsukhnenko commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/643#issuecomment-219503130
In addition to INET6_ADDRSTRLEN I think we should use inet_ntop instead of
inet_ntoa
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and h
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/638#issuecomment-219497534
Does this only happen on SSL connections? We're seeing something strange
related to IOBuffers and SSL connections.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can re
Github user calavera commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/638#issuecomment-219493880
Yeah, I totally agree with @shinrich. I don't think the NULL reference is
the real issue either. Unfortunately, my expertise with ATS code base and
internal beha
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/643#issuecomment-219486264
One more thing: This seems to only be for IPv4. I think we should support
both v4 and v6, so in addition to the code that is here to be modified for
IPv6, we also h
Github user pbchou commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219485292
I can only speak for Linux. However, it should be noted that if you grep
for 'optind = 0' under plugins/ there are around ten other plugins already
using optind =
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/644#issuecomment-219481655
Also, when you fix clang-format, can you squash the two commits into one?
No reason to retain the one without the license blurb.
---
If your project is set up for
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/630#issuecomment-219476441
This built and tested on Linux and FreeBSD.
https://ci.trafficserver.apache.org/view/github/job/Github-Linux/79/
https://ci.trafficserver.apache.org/view
Github user shinrich commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/630#issuecomment-219461971
Added the automake check for DH_get_2048_256 and verified it on openssl
1.0.1 and openssl 1.1.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/644#issuecomment-219461575
The unfortunately fails the clang-format test:
https://ci.trafficserver.apache.org/view/github/job/Github-Linux/78/console
---
If your project is set up for it, yo
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/643#issuecomment-219454899
I ran the CI on this, unfortunately the patch does not format with
clang-format. See e.g.
https://ci.trafficserver.apache.org/view/github/job/Github-Linux/74/consol
Github user atsci commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/642#issuecomment-219453932
Can one of the admins verify this patch? Only approve PRs which have been
reviewed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user atsci commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/644#issuecomment-219453919
Can one of the admins verify this patch? Only approve PRs which have been
reviewed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user atsci commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/643#issuecomment-219453924
Can one of the admins verify this patch? Only approve PRs which have been
reviewed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/635#issuecomment-219453714
Gotcha. Yeah, I saw #643 so we'll work there :).
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user yatsukhnenko commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/635#issuecomment-219453554
Github closed this PR because I renamed a brunch in my repo
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on G
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/643#issuecomment-219448977
Yep, this looks much better. I'll do another round of reviews in a little
bit.
Thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email a
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/635#issuecomment-219448713
It's ok either way, but you don't have to close a PR if you plan on making
a new, different change. Just force push the new changes up to the same PR if
you like.
GitHub user yatsukhnenko opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/644
[TS 4437] Add new limit rate example plugin
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/yatsukhnenko/trafficserver TS-4437
Alte
Github user yatsukhnenko closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/615
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the fe
GitHub user yatsukhnenko opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/643
[TS-4443] regex_remap: fix $i substitution
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/yatsukhnenko/trafficserver TS-4443
Alter
Github user yatsukhnenko commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/635#issuecomment-219446853
I'll open new pull request for this
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your p
Github user yatsukhnenko closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/635
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the fe
Github user SolidWallOfCode commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/642#issuecomment-219447229
I would like to avoid "client_addr" and "server_addr" as methods because
those terms are frequently ambiguous. I would much prefer "local" and "remote"
in
Github user shinrich commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/630#issuecomment-219440101
The original code does not use the DH_get_2038_256 function. It
effectively rolled it's own. I don't think this is a huge concern, Setting
your own DH key seem
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/630#issuecomment-219438437
> On May 16, 2016, at 7:13 AM, Susan Hinrichs
wrote:
>
> Interesting. It looks like the openssl version on freeBSD is not labeled
1.1, but it d
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/630#issuecomment-219439183
I agree on the first part, but depending on the situation, not on the
second part. The emulations have caused grief (major bugs) in the past. What
can happen in the
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/630#issuecomment-219437943
A check might be more portable going forward? Like, maybe this is a
libressl or something issue ?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user shinrich commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/630#issuecomment-219435190
Interesting. It looks like the openssl version on freeBSD is not labeled
1.1, but it does have this particular function. We could do configure time
checks to d
Github user shinrich commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/638#issuecomment-219429642
I'm ok with this change. It does solve the immediate problem, but I fear
that this may be a symptom of a broader issue. I spent some time this winter
tracking
Github user shinrich closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/639
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the featur
Github user shinrich commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/639#issuecomment-219422987
Looks like this fixes a stupid error. I'll go ahead and merge it up.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appea
Hi All,
I have opened a pull request about the NetVC Context proposal to evaluate.
Thanks
Oknet
2016-04-23 10:28 GMT+08:00 Chao Xu :
> As a proxy, there has two side: client side ( Client <-> Proxy ) and
> server side ( Proxy <-> Server ).
>
> Add a new member 'netvc_context' into class NetVCo
GitHub user oknet opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/642
Proposal: NetVC Context
In the NetVConnection, we have get_local_addr() and get_remote_addr()
method.
Also have members local_addr, remote_addr and netvc->con.addr.
Thus, we should
52 matches
Mail list logo
