From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <m.limbeck@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC9029763
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Apr 2022 11:04:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AF8C1244CD
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Apr 2022 11:04:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 43FBD244C1
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Apr 2022 11:04:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 767E646F79
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri,  1 Apr 2022 10:58:02 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <df61c357-c18d-da32-2643-3830aee70da8@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 10:57:49 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.7.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Dietmar Maurer <dietmar@proxmox.com>,
 Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <287966750.23.1648786881113@webmail.proxmox.com>
From: Mira Limbeck <m.limbeck@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <287966750.23.1648786881113@webmail.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.319 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH proxmox-openid-rs] fix Open ID with Azure as
 provider
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2022 09:04:57 -0000

On 4/1/22 06:21, Dietmar Maurer wrote:
>>       let response = if let Method::POST = request.method {
>> -        req.send(&*request.body)
>> +        let bytes = request.body.as_slice();
>> +        req.send_bytes(bytes)
> Does this have the side effect of changing the transfer encoding? If so, it is worth to add an inline comment.

This makes sure that `Transfer-Encoding` is not set at all, but instead 
`Content-Length` is set.

AFAIK either one of those is required, but not both at the same time. 
And some endpoints don't seem to accept `Transfer-Encoding: chunked`.

I'll add an inline comment mentioning that, thanks!