On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 06:55:46PM +0500, ??? wrote:
> (it's master)
>
> is it in purpose ?
>
> [src/ssl_sock.c:1553]: (warning) Invalid test for overflow
> 'msg+rec_len overflow is UB.
The code is :
rec_len = (msg[0] << 8) + msg[1];
msg += 2;
if (msg + rec_len
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 10:23:47PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Willy,
>
> Am 19.03.2018 um 22:15 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
> > Looks like it indeed. By then there was no "http-request" ruleset
> > either. Maybe we could move it to a place where it's generated
> > earlier, or maybe we could ensure t
Willy,
Am 19.03.2018 um 22:15 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
> Looks like it indeed. By then there was no "http-request" ruleset
> either. Maybe we could move it to a place where it's generated
> earlier, or maybe we could ensure that it's computed on the fly
> when the associated sample fetch function is
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 10:04:25PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Willy,
>
> Am 19.03.2018 um 21:47 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
> > Simply because unique-id was created many years before the extensible
> > log-format ou know today existed, and that apparently nobody felt the
> > need to port it. It may
Willy,
Am 19.03.2018 um 21:47 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
> Simply because unique-id was created many years before the extensible
> log-format ou know today existed, and that apparently nobody felt the
> need to port it. It may be as simple as creating a few sample fetches,
> I don't know.
This was mo
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 09:40:01PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> As a side question: Why do I have to do unique-id-header, instead of
> http-request set-header for the unique request ID? And why can't I
> capture it with capture (request|response) header but instead have to
> plug into manually int
Willy,
Am 19.03.2018 um 11:54 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
>> This issue prevents me from submitting one domain to the HSTS preload
>> list, as I need to perform a redirect on the zone's apex and that
>> redirect does not include the HSTS header.
>
> I *suspect* that in the end we could simply add a se
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 08:41:16PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> For me, "experimental" simply means "we did our best to ensure it works
> but we're realist and know that bug-free doesn't exist, so a risk remains
> that a bug will be hard enough to fix so as to force you to disable the
> feature fo
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 08:28:14PM +0100, William Dauchy wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 07:28:16PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > Threading was clearly released with an experimental status, just like
> > H2, because we knew we'd be facing some post-release issues in these
> > two areas that are
Hi Willy,
Thank your for your detailed answer.
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 07:28:16PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Threading was clearly released with an experimental status, just like
> H2, because we knew we'd be facing some post-release issues in these
> two areas that are hard to get 100% right
Hi William,
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 06:57:50PM +0100, William Dauchy wrote:
> > However, be careful. This new implementation should be thread-safe
> > (hopefully...). But it is not optimal and in some situations, it could be
> > really
> > slower in multi-threaded mode than in single-threaded one
Hi Christopher,
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 04:05:04PM +0100, Christopher Faulet wrote:
> From 91b1349b6a1a64d43cc41e8546ff1d1ce17a8e14 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Christopher Faulet
> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:18:06 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] BUG/MAJOR: threads/queue: Fix thread-safety issues on
(it's master)
is it in purpose ?
[src/ssl_sock.c:1553]: (warning) Invalid test for overflow
'msg+rec_len
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 09:48:21PM +0100, Thierry Fournier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a lot of minor patches.
>
> * The 0001 should be backported in 1.7. The backport is done in the
>patch v17_0001.
>
> * The 0002 should be backported in 1.7 and 1.6
>
> * The 0003 could be backported in 1.
Hi Darren,
On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 05:29:47PM +, Darren Demicoli wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Recently I needed to substitute http headers in requests such as the
> following:
>
> From
> Referer: https://a-b-c.example.com/x-caliber
> To
> Referer: https://a.b.c.example.com/x-caliber
>
> Basically a
Hi guys,
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:58:41AM +0300, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote:
(...)
> > Agree. Updated patch attached.
> >
> > Bernard.
>
>
> Is this patch good, Lukas?
> Any plans to integrate it?
Just noticed this one now and took it. I also backported it to 1.8.
Thanks!
Willy
Hi Manu,
On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 05:10:05PM +0100, Emmanuel Hocdet wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Series of patches to support CRC32c checksum to proxy protocol v2 header
> (as describe in "doc/proxy-protocol.txt »)
> . add hash_crc32c function
> . add « crc32c » option to proxy-v2-options
> . check crc32c che
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:02:33AM +0100, Aurélien Nephtali wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This patch fixes a crash when the CLI is fed with too many arguments:
>
> $ seq -s ' ' 0 64 | socat /tmp/sock1 -
Wow, nice one, thanks!
Willy
Hi Aurélien,
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:27:31PM +0100, Aurélien Nephtali wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This patch adds some missing LF to the outputs of some commands.
> It may break some scripts that rely on these broken outputs but it also
> breaks the parsing of pipelined commands.
Good catch! In fact
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 05:54:09PM +0100, Olivier Houchard wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Trying to do a seemless reload while at least one socket has been bound to
> a specifig interface will lead to a segfault, because the guy who wrote that
> code did it by copying/pasting, and forgot to change an instanc
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 04:43:29PM +0500, ??? wrote:
> Hello,
>
> small issue (no real impact) identified by cppcheck
> From 733d99f42d93898232bb8c3c953b662ee889c034 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ilya Shipitsin
> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 16:38:38 +0500
> Subject: [PATCH] CLEANUP:
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 04:27:43PM +0500, ??? wrote:
> [src/51d.c:373]: (error) Invalid number of character '{' when no macros are
> defined.
Just a small hint, please always mention which version (or ideally commit)
you report issues like this.
>From what I'm seeing, the program is
Hi Olivier,
On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 05:55:33PM +0100, Olivier Doucet wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I can see several fixes in 1.8 trunk about 100% CPU usage and some other
> bugs.
> Last release was more than a month ago. Is there a new release expected
> soon ? I'm about to start using 1.8 on some pro
Hi Tim,
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:37:44AM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Willy,
>
> I'd like to bring this issue to your attention again, possibly you are
> able to find a solution for haproxy 1.9?
I hope so, but we'll need to be sure that someone is assigned to this,
otherwise I'll keep being b
Hi Philipp,
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 05:34:33PM +0100, Philipp Kolmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I had a patch for my issue with multi-port + multi-server listener that got
> fixed in 1.7.10 that seems to have gotten forgotten. I add this patch again.
>
> Thanks for considering adding it to the test cases
Hi Nikhil,
On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 05:39:29PM +, Nikhil Kapoor wrote:
> Actually, I just wanted to deeply understand the code of haproxy. So just
> wanted to know which tool should i use in order to understand the code. Is it
> only gdb that you all use or any other?
Well, gdb is not suited t
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:31:47PM +, Gisle Grimen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are using HA-Proxy with sticky routing in front of our cluster. Is there a
> way to get HA-Proxy to add or set an header on a forwarded request when
> HA-Proxy "breaks" sticky routing i.e. when forwarding the request t
Hi Jonathan,
On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 02:46:20PM +, Jonathan Matthews wrote:
> On 30 January 2018 at 09:04, Baptiste wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Please find enclosed a few patches which adds a new HTTP action into
> > HAProxy: do-resolve.
> > This action can be used to perform DNS resolution ba
28 matches
Mail list logo