Skip to content

Conversation

@PeteGillinElastic
Copy link
Member

The reindex documentation previously referenced the node setting needed to whitelist remote hosts. This does not apply to serverless. This change clarifies this, and documents the hosts allowed in serverless.

The reindex documentation previously referenced the node setting
needed to whitelist remote hosts. This does not apply to
serverless. This change clarifies this, and documents the hosts
allowed in serverless.
@PeteGillinElastic PeteGillinElastic added the skip-backport This pull request should not be backported label Nov 3, 2025
@PeteGillinElastic
Copy link
Member Author

Skipping backport as the change only really affects serverless.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 3, 2025

Following you can find the validation changes against the target branch for the APIs.

No changes detected.

You can validate these APIs yourself by using the make validate target.

@PeteGillinElastic PeteGillinElastic marked this pull request as ready for review November 3, 2025 18:52
@PeteGillinElastic
Copy link
Member Author

Hoping to get this reviewed and ready to review once the change goes live.

Copy link

@samxbr samxbr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! I assume this doc change will be merged after the whitelist setting is added for production.

@PeteGillinElastic
Copy link
Member Author

LGTM! I assume this doc change will be merged after the whitelist setting is added for production.

Yeah, exactly.

Copy link

@pete-naylor pete-naylor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @PeteGillinElastic - I think it is good to go!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

skip-backport This pull request should not be backported specification

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants