From: "Fabian Grünbichler" <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH proxmox-acme 1/1] Close the acme standalone connection after sending a response
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 13:55:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1601553281.hf4ta6d6wj.astroid@nora.none> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1408702569.181241.1601549706910.JavaMail.zimbra@fws.fr>
On October 1, 2020 12:55 pm, Daniel Berteaud wrote:
> ----- Le 1 Oct 20, à 11:15, Fabian Grünbichler f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com a écrit :
>
>> On September 30, 2020 4:09 pm, Daniel Berteaud wrote:
>>> Without this, the first req get a response, but not the next ones as the
>>> listeners stays busy
>>> Fixes #3048
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Berteaud <daniel@firewall-services.com>
>>> ---
>>> src/PVE/ACME/StandAlone.pm | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/src/PVE/ACME/StandAlone.pm b/src/PVE/ACME/StandAlone.pm
>>> index 0e2ece6..552c35c 100644
>>> --- a/src/PVE/ACME/StandAlone.pm
>>> +++ b/src/PVE/ACME/StandAlone.pm
>>> @@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ sub setup {
>>> } else {
>>> $c->send_error(404, 'Not found.')
>>> }
>>> + $c->close();
>>
>> I think this is not right - we only end up looping/blocking on
>> get_request if the client requested keep alive, in which case the server
>> should obviously not close the connection..
>>
>> I guess we have to fork (up to some limit) on accept()? it's obviously
>> not ideal that anybody can race with the LE validation attempts and
>> block the single request handler ;)
>
> Indeed, having a few more handlers could limit the risk of this happening.
>
>>
>> maybe you can change something in your apache config to close the
>> connection (or rather, to propagate the connection closing from the
>> actual client)? it looks like this can only affect you if
>> - your apache proxy keeps the connection open
>> - your apache proxy does not re-use the open connection
>
> You're right, the issue was on my rev proxy, which didn't re-used keep-alived connexions as it should (it was an old httpd 2.2.3 on a CentOS 5 box, on which I had no control).
> Switching my setup so it now runs behind a nginx proxypass works normaly without any modification
>
> Sorry for not having looked at this more closely before posting ;-)
no worries. I retitled the bug you filed to track the actual issue -
feel free to write a patch for it anyway ;)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-01 11:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-30 14:09 [pve-devel] [PATCH proxmox-acme 0/1] " Daniel Berteaud
2020-09-30 14:09 ` [pve-devel] [PATCH proxmox-acme 1/1] " Daniel Berteaud
2020-10-01 9:15 ` Fabian Grünbichler
2020-10-01 10:55 ` Daniel Berteaud
2020-10-01 11:55 ` Fabian Grünbichler [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1601553281.hf4ta6d6wj.astroid@nora.none \
--to=f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com \
--cc=pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox