-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 83
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
Expose use_remote_address #1290
Expose use_remote_address #1290
Conversation
@skonto: The label(s) In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ func TestNewHTTPConnectionManagerWithoutAccessLogWithoutProxyProtocol(t *testing | |||
} | |||
connManager := NewHTTPConnectionManager("test", &kourierConfig) | |||
assert.Check(t, len(connManager.AccessLog) == 0) | |||
assert.Check(t, connManager.UseRemoteAddress == nil) | |||
assert.Check(t, connManager.UseRemoteAddress.Value == false) |
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.
Are they mutual exclusive? Should we warn the user? 🤔
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 do you mean by that?
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.
I mean can we use proxy protocol along with use-remote-address, what if both are enabled? I will check if that creates an issue.
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 does not seem to create a problem in gateway logs but don't have an environment to easily check this with traffic.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1290 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 62.31% 62.38% +0.06%
==========================================
Files 24 24
Lines 1632 1635 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 1017 1020 +3
Misses 553 553
Partials 62 62 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
@ReToCode any idea about the tls failures? |
I don't see any failures? /lgtm /hold feel free to merge when ready. |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ReToCode, skonto The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Yeah I re-run it check here: https://github.com/knative-extensions/net-kourier/actions/runs/10958128614/attempts/2?pr=1290 (it passed with the 3rd attempt). |
Hm, might be flaky (don't know). But has nothing to do with your change here. |
/unhold |
Changes
X-Envoy-External-Address
.To observe use in config-observability:
For more check Example 1 in here.
/kind enhancement
Fixes #1289
Release Note
Docs