Once connection is established, state is created in PF. Subsequent requests 
will be ’pipelined’.
It is possible to influence this behavior by manipulating tcp.established in 
pf.conf,
but I don’t think this is what you want.

> 16 aug. 2017 kl. 10:05 skrev Mischa Peters <obs...@high5.nl>:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> I have somewhat the following config for relayd running on 6.1.
> And I am trying to forward certain request paths to different hosts.
> 
> table <wwwhost> { xx.xx.xx.131 }
> table <otherhost> { xx.xx.xx.31 }
> http protocol httpsfilter {
>       match request header remove "Proxy"
>       match request header append "X-Forwarded-For" value "$REMOTE_ADDR"
>       match request header append "X-Forwarded-By" value 
> "$SERVER_ADDR:$SERVER_PORT"
> 
>       match response header set "Server" value "Sever"
>       match response header set "X-Powered-By" value "Power"
>       match response header set "X-Frame-Options" value "SAMEORIGIN"
>       match response header set "X-Xss-Protection" value "1; mode=block"
>       match response header set "X-Content-Type-Options" value "nosniff"
> 
>       match request quick path "/crm/" forward to <otherhost>
> 
>       tcp { no splice }
> }
> relay host_tls {
>       listen on $ext_addr_v4 port 443 tls
>       listen on $ext_addr_v6 port 443 tls
>       protocol httpsfilter
>       forward to <wwwhost> port 80 check http "/" host example.com code 200
>       forward to <otherhost> port 80
> }
> 
> I have tried both "match request quick path" and "match request quick url" 
> but what I noticed is that as soon as you have visited one of the URLs that 
> needs forwarding to a different host you end up at the <otherhost> for all 
> subsequent requests.
> With "match request quick url" this is to be expected as it checks everything 
> up to /.
> 
> For example:
> 
> http://example.com/ -> wwwhost
> http://example.com/crm/ -> otherhost
> http://exmaple.com/folder/ -> otherhost
> 
> Is this expected behaviour for "match request quick path" as well?
> Is there any way to do this type of load balancing?
> 
> Thanx!!
> 
> Mischa
> 

Reply via email to