Now new infrastructure, so this is definitely triggered by upgrading jetty.
However, the actual issue might be caused by new behaviour in jetty
triggering a bug in big ip.

Stefan


2014-01-28 "" <[email protected]>

> Stefan,
>
> You said this was an 8.x to 9.x upgrade, so if the F5 was existing, it
> shouldn't be an issue unless there are infrastructure changes at the same
> time for upgrade.  We use F5 and the only time we have seen something
> similar was where a perimeter f/w was dropping an established connection
> (due to inactivity) within the keep alive time.   When the f/w does that
> the browser does not know the connection it has is stuffed.
>
> tcpdump is the best approach.
>
>
>
>
> On 28 January 2014 08:45, Stefan Magnus Landrø <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Simone! I'm afraid I have to agree with you - this probably won't
>> fix my issue. I'll do some tcpdumping in the next few days - I'll keep you
>> posted. This might as well turn out being a f5 big ip issue.
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>> 2014-01-27 Simone Bordet <[email protected]>
>>
>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:36 PM, "" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > Good find and a _critical_ bug in my view.
>>> >
>>> > A change that came with 9.0 as it was this in 8.x :-
>>> >
>>> >                      _header.put(CONNECTION_KEEP_ALIVE);
>>> >                      if (connection!=null)
>>> >                      {
>>> >                          _header.setPutIndex(_header.putIndex()-2);
>>> >                          _header.put((byte)',');
>>> >                          _header.put(connection.toString().getBytes());
>>> >                          _header.put(CRLF);
>>> >                      }
>>> >
>>> > which had less logic, shorter lines... Yes, it copied 2 more bytes
>>> than it
>>> > needed to but I would prefer less logic/shorter code over saving 2
>>> bytes.
>>> >
>>> > To fix this, you could _try_ turning off one connect on the f5 if you
>>> don't
>>> > need it for other reasons.
>>> >
>>> > We are also behind an F5, and are just about to start looking at
>>> moving from
>>> > 8.x to 9.x.   ... so thanks ... will raise on support.
>>>
>>> I filed https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=426739 and fixed
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Note that this is a corner case that should happen very rarely, only
>>> when the "Connection" header gets some custom value that is not
>>> "close" or "upgrade" or "keep-alive".
>>>
>>> Therefore, I am dubious that the original problem (curl hanging for
>>> chunked responses) is fixed by this fix.
>>>
>>> Let us know if that is the case, though.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Simone Bordet
>>> ----
>>> http://cometd.org
>>> http://webtide.com
>>> http://intalio.com
>>> Developer advice, training, services and support
>>> from the Jetty & CometD experts.
>>> Intalio, the modern way to build business applications.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jetty-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-users
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> BEKK Open
>> http://open.bekk.no
>>
>> TesTcl - a unit test framework for iRules
>> http://testcl.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jetty-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-users
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jetty-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
jetty-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-users

Reply via email to