-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.7k
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
Clarify behavior after max_connection_time timeout #34384
Comments
The docs you linke are quite old, v1.19.5. The current docs say, for a downstream connection, that if there are active streams the drain sequence is initiated. (https://www.envoyproxy.io/docs/envoy/latest/api-v3/config/core/v3/protocol.proto#config-core-v3-httpprotocoloptions) |
Thank you. The latest version of the documentation state:
and
This still does not resolve my confusion. If a TCP connection has continuously active streams, after both |
@ktalg if you were able to raise a PR to clarify the docs i would be happy to review |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had activity in the last 30 days. It will be closed in the next 7 days unless it is tagged "help wanted" or "no stalebot" or other activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
This issue has been automatically closed because it has not had activity in the last 37 days. If this issue is still valid, please ping a maintainer and ask them to label it as "help wanted" or "no stalebot". Thank you for your contributions. |
Title: One line description
when max_connection_time and drain_timeout reached,the http2 connection wouldn't be closed if there's any active stream, which does not match what doc says
Description:
according to:
https://www.envoyproxy.io/docs/envoy/v1.19.5/api-v3/config/core/v3/protocol.proto#config-core-v3-httpprotocoloptions
But recently I ran a test and looked at the client trace logs:
After the second goaway, the server does not actively close the connection (stream exists) until the client closes (30 seconds later).
Is this behavior correct? Or maybe I missed something.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: