Re: Ready: PROXY protocol v2 support

2020-01-12 Thread Wietse Venema
HAProxy v2 support is now part of the regular Postfix 3.5 development release. No support for CRC32, pending a fix in the HAProxy code. Wietse

Re: Ready: PROXY protocol v2 support

2020-01-07 Thread Tamás Gérczei
I've just tested it by spinning up an instance of this version behind an AWS NLB and connecting to the load balancer from the outside - it worked well, nevertheless I'd encourage others to test as well. Log snippets follow: # with smtpd_upstream_proxy_protocol defaulted to empty postfix-test-7cbd5

Re: Ready: PROXY protocol v2 support

2020-01-05 Thread Tamás Gérczei
Thank you Wietse, I will test this week and let you know. On 1/6/20 12:42 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: > You can test haproxy v2 protocol support in postfix-3.5-20200105-nonprod > (http://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/index.html). I > have done all the testing that I can do. It would be gr

Ready: PROXY protocol v2 support

2020-01-05 Thread Wietse Venema
You can test haproxy v2 protocol support in postfix-3.5-20200105-nonprod (http://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/index.html). I have done all the testing that I can do. It would be great is someone can test it against some real haproxy client. Haproxy v2 protocol support is limited to TC

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2020-01-01 Thread Tamás Gérczei
Amazing. Thank you! On 1/2/20 1:41 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: Maybe you can try to implement v2 support ? Parsing v2 when v1 is already supported is quite easy, especially at the same level of support (i.e. no TLV field support for TLS or whatever). You can have a look at conn_re

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2020-01-01 Thread Wietse Venema
> > > Maybe you can try to implement v2 support ? Parsing v2 when v1 is already > > > supported is quite easy, especially at the same level of support (i.e. no > > > TLV field support for TLS or whatever). You can have a look at > > > conn_recv_proxy() in haproxy:src/connection.c which supports the

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-31 Thread Wietse Venema
Wietse Venema: > Willy Tarreau: > > On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 08:21:05AM +0100, Tam?s G?rczei wrote: > > > Thanks Wietse, this is what I thought and found out during my > > > experiments,That said, now knowing that only v1 is supported, may I ask > > > whether you have considered implementing v2 supp

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-31 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 11:38:06AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: > I have a question about the v2 protocol spec. > > - \x0 : LOCAL : the connection was established on purpose by the > proxy without being relayed. The connection endpoints are the > sender and the receiver. Such connections

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-31 Thread Wietse Venema
I have a question about the v2 protocol spec. - \x0 : LOCAL : the connection was established on purpose by the proxy without being relayed. The connection endpoints are the sender and the receiver. Such connections exist when the proxy sends health-checks to the server. The receiver

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-31 Thread Tamás Gérczei
Many thanks in advance for all your efforts in this regard, Wietse! On 12/31/19 5:08 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > Willy Tarreau: >> On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 08:21:05AM +0100, Tam?s G?rczei wrote: >>> Thanks Wietse, this is what I thought and found out during my >>> experiments,That said, now knowing

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-31 Thread Wietse Venema
Willy Tarreau: > On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 08:21:05AM +0100, Tam?s G?rczei wrote: > > Thanks Wietse, this is what I thought and found out during my > > experiments,That said, now knowing that only v1 is supported, may I ask > > whether you have considered implementing v2 support? I'm about to > > mig

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-31 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 10:34:14AM +0100, Tamás Gérczei wrote: > Thanks Willy, I appreciate the clue and your helpful intention - > unfortunately this isn't something I can personally do owing to lack of > knowledge. I don't know whether the v1 implementation had been a > community patch or somethi

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-31 Thread Tamás Gérczei
Thanks Willy, I appreciate the clue and your helpful intention - unfortunately this isn't something I can personally do owing to lack of knowledge. I don't know whether the v1 implementation had been a community patch or something Wietse or Viktor have done. On 12/31/19 8:35 AM, Willy Tarreau wrot

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-30 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 08:21:05AM +0100, Tamás Gérczei wrote: > Thanks Wietse, this is what I thought and found out during my > experiments,That said, now knowing that only v1 is supported, may I ask > whether you have considered implementing v2 support? I'm about to > migrate to a setup where I'm

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-30 Thread Tamás Gérczei
Thanks Wietse, this is what I thought and found out during my experiments,That said, now knowing that only v1 is supported, may I ask whether you have considered implementing v2 support? I'm about to migrate to a setup where I'm behind a load balancer that only speaks v2. Yours, Tamás On 12/30/19

Re: PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-30 Thread Wietse Venema
Tam?s G?rczei: > Hello List, > > I'd like to ask if PROXY protocol v2 is supported by Postfix? It's not mentioned in documentation, therefore it is not supported. Ditto for memcached v2 protocol. Wietse

PROXY protocol v2 support

2019-12-30 Thread Tamás Gérczei
Hello List, I'd like to ask if PROXY protocol v2 is supported by Postfix? Thanks, Tamás