> Am 30.06.2023 um 17:22 schrieb Stefan Eissing via dev <dev@httpd.apache.org>:
>
>
>
>> Am 30.06.2023 um 16:45 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/30/23 4:15 PM, Stefan Eissing via dev wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Am 30.06.2023 um 15:56 schrieb Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 2:44 PM Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/30/23 11:08 AM, ic...@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>> Author: icing
>>>>>> Date: Fri Jun 30 09:08:23 2023
>>>>>> New Revision: 1910704
>>>>>>
>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1910704&view=rev
>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>> proxy: in proxy tunnels, use the smaller timeout value of
>>>>>> client and origin as timeout for polling the tunnel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Modified:
>>>>>> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
>>>>>> URL:
>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/proxy_util.c?rev=1910704&r1=1910703&r2=1910704&view=diff
>>>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>>>> --- httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/proxy_util.c (original)
>>>>>> +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/proxy_util.c Fri Jun 30 09:08:23 2023
>>>>>> @@ -4921,9 +4921,9 @@ PROXY_DECLARE(apr_status_t) ap_proxy_tun
>>>>>> apr_socket_timeout_get(tunnel->origin->pfd->desc.s, &origin_timeout);
>>>>>> apr_socket_opt_set(tunnel->origin->pfd->desc.s, APR_SO_NONBLOCK, 1);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - /* Defaults to the biggest timeout of both connections */
>>>>>> - tunnel->timeout = (origin_timeout >= 0 && origin_timeout >
>>>>>> client_timeout)?
>>>>>> - origin_timeout : client_timeout;
>>>>>> + /* Defaults to the smallest timeout of both connections */
>>>>>> + tunnel->timeout = (client_timeout >= 0 && client_timeout <
>>>>>> origin_timeout ?
>>>>>> + client_timeout : origin_timeout);
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> We discussed this (quickly) with Stefan on
>>>> https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/366, but hey the commit is here
>>>> for review finally :)
>>>>
>>>>> It was the other way round on purpose, e.g. if Timeout is set to 5 for a
>>>>> small front end timeout and ProxyTimeout is set to
>>>>> e.g. 600 to keep Websockets open for 10 minutes.
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me that using Timeout (5s) here is a valid case too if
>>>> Timeout < ProxyTimeout (as in your example) is a way to limit how long
>>>> a client can consume httpd resources.
>>>> So maybe we should only use the backend timeout which is an easy(er)
>>>> way for the user to control this?
>>>
>>> So, the goal is to allow someone keeping the websocket open for longer
>>> than we usually allow for HTTP requests, to set a long ProxyTimeout or
>>> timeout parameter to ProxyPass.
>>>
>>> For HTTP/1.1 that would override the connection Timeout, since the tunnel
>>> poll would only use the largest value.
>>>
>>> For HTTP/2 I have to check how that how to accomplish that. The working
>>> there is different.
>>
>> Sorry for being a bit grumpy above, but this came out of the blue for me. It
>> breaks an important use case for me and the use case
>> for the other way round was not clear to me. Maybe we can find a solution
>> that addresses both use cases at best by default and
>> automatically. Any pointers for your use case such that I can have a look
>> and be more constructive :-).
>>
>
> Thanks that you spoke up! I heard no grumpiness. ;)
Ok, testing how things *REALLY* work here, I stumbled upon:
mod_proxy_http.c:1570
/* Let proxy tunnel forward everything within this thread */
req->tunnel->timeout = req->idle_timeout;
status = ap_proxy_tunnel_run(req->tunnel);
which overrides everything we discussed. So, how do we want this to work and
who has the final say?
- Stefan
