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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
http2: support custom SETTINGS parameters #9964
http2: support custom SETTINGS parameters #9964
Changes from 28 commits
9691ae7
28cdf4d
bad389c
4b78a16
0f50401
16b8ba7
08ab741
b553ef5
fdc7c9b
cc5fe09
6def08e
1cf9c32
6bfbfc6
5632a90
b764d34
9455741
78d3e63
8b7621c
7f18239
07c1814
8293133
31c56a0
cb35501
43b83bf
be39274
e48de85
59e2dfe
3f513d4
53bf245
cf8f7f2
ad297e2
6ae55cd
a3dd8bf
e5b5e53
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
should we deprecate that field to avoid the confusion in the next api rev?
If so let's update the docs to make this the default way to configure etc.
Also if we can consider it a failure to configure both I would - best to avoid confusion.
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 is the deprecation process to follow? I found https://github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/blob/master//CONTRIBUTING.md#breaking-change-policy, and given the level of effort I would prefer to introduce the deprecation in a follow up PR if possible to avoid holding this up.
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.
Yes +1 on let's do this in a follow up. I would like to land this PR and it's complex enough as it is. I agree with @alyssawilk that we should do this. Can you open an issue to track?
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.
SG. Filed #10412.
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.
cool, I'm fine with a follow-up for deprecation but I'd be inclined to mention the plan in the API comments as well.
I'd also still suggest we disallow it being set both ways for the 2 years until we can remove the deprecated field, which I think should land with this PR unless it's super complicated. Thoughts there?
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.
Just to clarify, is your proposal that
allow_connect
should only be allowed to be configured via a custom parameter?Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.