Re: haproxy 1.9.6 segfault in srv_update_status

Hi Patrick, On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 01:22:41AM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > We haven't had a chance to update to 1.9.8 yet, so we're still running 1.9.6 > (Linux) in production, and just had 2 segfaults happen a little over an hour > apart. When I look at the core dumps from them, the stack trac

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Kill deprecated configuration options

Willy, Am 15.05.19 um 05:06 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > Hi Tim, > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 08:57:55PM +0200, Tim Duesterhus wrote: >> Okay, I did a sweep through the configuration parser and: >> >> 1. Made deprecated directives fatal and removed them from the docs. The >>error messages speak of

Re: Zero RTT in backend server side

Hello Olivier, In another subject related to 0rtt was wondering why it was not available in ssl-default-bind-options? Thanks, -- William

Re: Zero RTT in backend server side

Hi William, On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 01:10:37PM +0200, William Dauchy wrote: > Hello Olivier, > > In another subject related to 0rtt was wondering why it was not > available in ssl-default-bind-options? > We usually only add options in ssl-default-bind-options that can later be overriden on a pe

Re: Zero RTT in backend server side

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 2:10 PM Olivier Houchard wrote: > We usually only add options in ssl-default-bind-options that can later be > overriden on a per-bind basis, but right now, there's no option to disable > 0RTT. Thanks for the explanation! -- William

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Kill deprecated configuration options

Willy, Am 15.05.19 um 11:31 schrieb Tim Düsterhus: >>> 2. 'req*' and 'rsp*'. I remember that they allow some modification that >>>cannot easily be replicated otherwise (but I'll have to check that >>>first). >> >> Sure but practically speaking such modifications do not make sense in >> the

[ANNOUNCE] haproxy-2.0-dev3

Hi, HAProxy 2.0-dev3 was released on 2019/05/15. It added 393 new commits after version 2.0-dev2. This is another huge version, having been distacted by a number of bugs lately, this one was postponed a bit too much in my taste. As usual for a development version, I'll skip over the bugfixes whic

Re: PATCH: enable cirrus-ci (freebsd builds)

Hello, can we enable cirrus-ci ? it's like travis-ci, it allows run freebsd builds ср, 1 мая 2019 г. в 14:11, Илья Шипицин : > hello! > > can you please enable cirrus-ci on https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy ? > > > -- Forwarded message - > От: Илья Шипицин > Date: вт, 30 апр. 2

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Kill deprecated configuration options

Am 15.05.2019 um 17:09 schrieb Tim Düsterhus: > Willy, > > Am 15.05.19 um 11:31 schrieb Tim Düsterhus: 2. 'req*' and 'rsp*'. I remember that they allow some modification that cannot easily be replicated otherwise (but I'll have to check that first). >>> >>> Sure but practicall

Re: [ANNOUNCE] haproxy-1.9.8

Am 13.05.2019 um 16:57 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > Hi, > > HAProxy 1.9.8 was released on 2019/05/13. It added 53 new commits > after version 1.9.7. > > The most important bugs fall into 3 main categories here : > - a possible crash in multi-threads when issuing "show map" or > "show acl" on th

Re: PATCH: enable cirrus-ci (freebsd builds)

Hi Ilya, On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 12:05:47AM +0500, ??? wrote: > Hello, > > can we enable cirrus-ci ? it's like travis-ci, it allows run freebsd builds I have no opinion on it, I don't know anything about it at all, so since you appear to know what it involves, you'll have to give me som

Re: [ANNOUNCE] haproxy-2.0-dev3

Am 15.05.2019 um 18:52 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > Hi, > > HAProxy 2.0-dev3 was released on 2019/05/15. It added 393 new commits > after version 2.0-dev2. > > This is another huge version, having been distacted by a number of bugs > lately, this one was postponed a bit too much in my taste. As usual

Re: [ANNOUNCE] haproxy-2.0-dev3

Aleks, Am 15.05.19 um 22:59 schrieb Aleksandar Lazic: > As we use more and more the CI features of github what's the opinion of the > community to use this features to create and push Container images to the > docker > registry via the CI? > > I'm fine to keep it as it is but from project point

Re: [ANNOUNCE] haproxy-2.0-dev3

Tim, Am 16.05.2019 um 00:32 schrieb Tim Düsterhus: > Aleks, > > Am 15.05.19 um 22:59 schrieb Aleksandar Lazic: >> As we use more and more the CI features of github what's the opinion of the >> community to use this features to create and push Container images to the >> docker >> registry via the

`option http_proxy` DNS and HTTPS support

Hi, since haproxy now has DNS, is now possible to make `option http_proxy` to do DNS and HTTPS, in some cases, we need to let part of requests go local network directly. Thanks in advance.