Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
mirrord policy for enforcing header pattern #3048
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
mirrord policy for enforcing header pattern #3048
Changes from 10 commits
9808c35
4347d1b
85fb685
e3d540a
2420d40
e86b138
3c402f0
18bc696
cd1aea4
4d37543
a5f9773
3c9680f
3fbdb95
a4a73eb
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What if multiple filters are used? Right now the user can specify any_of/all_of filters.
I think the semantics should be that an HTTP filter is accepted only when it has a header filter matching this pattern, and this header filter is required to match for the request to be stolen (so
any_of(some-path-filter, valid-header-filter)
would not pass the policy check). If so, this should probably be named likerequires_header_filter
orrequired_header_filter
, and the doc should mention the case of composed filters.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is also the possibility of multiple rules being applied on single target so making a correct regex can be tricky
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This breaks compatibility, we can't add new fields.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It should be fine because it's at the end of all messages that contain this result and it looks working for old layer > new operator and new layer > old operator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Like we don't have any message where
RemoteResult
isn't the last field (well all the places it's the only field)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This test mocks new intproxy and old operator, decoding the first message fails :<