-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.8k
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
Ext_proc: support RouteCacheAction in the filter config #33830
Ext_proc: support RouteCacheAction in the filter config #33830
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Yanjun Xiang <yanjunxiang@google.com>
CC @envoyproxy/api-shepherds: Your approval is needed for changes made to |
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.
Thank you!
I left one comment on code refactoring.
…g configuration parsing Signed-off-by: Yanjun Xiang <yanjunxiang@google.com>
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.
LGTM, @tyxia ?
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.
LGTM modulo two nits.
Thanks!
Signed-off-by: Yanjun Xiang <yanjunxiang@google.com>
/retest |
Signed-off-by: Yanjun Xiang <yanjunxiang@google.com>
Kind Ping! |
Kind Ping! |
/lgtm api |
This PR is a follow up change for: #33582.
It is to support RouteCacheAction to force clearing the route cache in ext_proc filter even side stream server does not send the clear_route_cache in the response.
Commit Message:
Additional Description:
Risk Level:
Testing:
Docs Changes:
Release Notes:
Platform Specific Features:
[Optional Runtime guard:]
[Optional Fixes #Issue]
[Optional Fixes commit #PR or SHA]
[Optional Deprecated:]
[Optional API Considerations:]