You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to bugs@httpd.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2015/11/06 12:43:14 UTC
[Bug 58593] New: mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
Bug ID: 58593
Summary: mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Product: Apache httpd-2
Version: 2.4.17
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: mod_proxy
Assignee: bugs@httpd.apache.org
Reporter: s.tabacchiera@gmail.com
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
Mina Galić <me...@igalic.co> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |me@igalic.co
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #3 from Tabby <s....@gmail.com> ---
Sorry for bothering,
any advice on this?
Thanks
ST
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #6 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
You could probably use something like:
<Proxy http://vip-be/wwgw/var/>
....
</Proxy>
in your configuration, so that this proxy http worker can be reused.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #2 from Tabby <s....@gmail.com> ---
Hi Yann,
not sure if this is a bug, anyway I don't know how to handle this case.
Scenario:
We have to serve both http and ws requests under the same URI, through an
apache reverse proxy.
I thought this would work:
<Location /ws/live/>
### Settings for WebSocket
ProxyPass ws://vip-be/wwgw/var/ disablereuse=on timeout=30
### Settings for HTTP
ProxyPass http://vip-be/wwgw/var/ smax=0 ttl=15
ProxyPassReverse http://vip-be/wwgw/var/
</Location>
but in case of websocket requests it seems mod_proxy always selects http
handler, instead of ws, despite the right choice of scheme done by the core.
Here are the logs:
[core:debug] protocol.c(1840): [client 172.26.130.177:59719] select protocol
from , choices=websocket for server wstest
[proxy:debug] mod_proxy.c(1160): [client 172.26.130.177:59719] AH01143:
Running scheme http handler (attempt 0)
[proxy:debug] proxy_util.c(2160): AH00942: HTTP: has acquired connection for
(vip-be)
[proxy:debug] proxy_util.c(2213): [client 172.26.130.177:59719] AH00944:
connecting http://vip-be/wwgw/var/5 to vip-be:80
[proxy:debug] proxy_util.c(2422): [client 172.26.130.177:59719] AH00947:
connected /wwgw/var/5 to vip-be:80
[proxy:debug] proxy_util.c(2799): AH02824: HTTP: connection established with
172.26.110.165:80 (vip-be)
[proxy:debug] proxy_util.c(2965): AH00962: HTTP: connection complete to
172.26.110.165:80 (vip-be)
[proxy:debug] proxy_util.c(2175): AH00943: http: has released connection for
(vip-be)
Am I missing something or doing it wrong?
Thanks
ST
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #19 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
New note added to
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/mod_proxy.html#protoupgrade (hth..).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #14 from Ruediger Pluem <rp...@apache.org> ---
Doesn't
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/mod_proxy_wstunnel.html#proxywebsocketfallbacktoproxyhttp
solve your issue?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #12 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Yann Ylavic from comment #11)
>
> The patch I proposed above may help though (not tested), maybe you could try
> it (instead of the RewriteRules, it should work without).
Please note that you may need to place "ProxyPass ws://..." before "ProxyPass
http://..." for it to work.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEEDINFO |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #26 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
Fixed in 2.4.47.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #24 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
Messed up examples:
> ProxyPass "/" "http://example.com/some/ws/capable/path/" upgrade=websocket
> and:
> ProxyPass "/" "ws://example.com//"
should read:
ProxyPass "/" "http://example.com/" upgrade=websocket
and:
ProxyPass "/" "ws://example.com/"
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #18 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
This documentation is about mod_proxy_wstunnel, and using mod_proxy_wstunnel
requires the mod_rewrite workaround still.
With 2.4.47 and newer it's possible to proxy the websocket protocol (ws and
wss) by using/loading mod_proxy_http only and adding upgrade=websocket to the
ProxyPass line.
Admittedly this is not well documented, that's why I'm trying to make this more
clear here. I'll try to update the general mod_proxy documentation about this
(https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/mod_proxy.html) since it talks about the
ProxyPrass upgrade= parameter as something related to mod_proxy_wstunnel only.
Help on documentation and other always welcome though..
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #21 from Mina Galić <me...@igalic.co> ---
one more question: could it be that the mod_rewrite workaround will work on
2.4.47+ without mod_proxy_wstunnel loaded, too?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #23 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
I mean with mod_proxy_http 2.4.47+ (and without mod_proxy_wstunnel), both:
ProxyPass "/" "http://example.com/some/ws/capable/path/" upgrade=websocket
and:
ProxyPass "/" "ws://example.com//"
work the same.
And mod_proxy_http will internally do the same as:
RewriteCond %{HTTP:Upgrade} websocket [NC]
RewriteCond %{HTTP:Connection} upgrade [NC]
without the need of mod_rewrite. If no websocket is negotiated by the client,
the request will be forwarded by using/enforcing HTTP as usual.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ylavic.dev@gmail.com
--- Comment #8 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
Created attachment 33314
--> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33314&action=edit
mod_proxy_wstunnel fall through http
Possibly a patch like this one could allow ProxyPass to either ws(s) or http(s)
on the same URL, depending on the Upgrade header, but it is probably a hack :/
We'd rather use the new Protocols negotiation to enable/decline
mod_proxy_wstunnel for a request, if that's possible/compatible.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #5 from Tabby <s....@gmail.com> ---
Hi,
that's exactly how I did as a workaround.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RewriteEngine On
# default protocol = ws
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ - [env=proto:ws]
# if request is plain http, set protocol = http
RewriteCond %{HTTP:Upgrade} !websocket [NC]
RewriteRule ^ - [env=proto:http]
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/ws/live/ [NC]
RewriteRule ^/ws/live/(.*) %{ENV:proto}://vip-be/wwgw/var/$1 [P,QSA,L]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, this way I'm forced to use mod_rewrite "Proxy" flag and this leads to
performance penalties, 'cause it won't use backend connection pooling (default
worker being used).
Is should be really nice if I could use Env interpolation even in the scheme
part of the URL (something like: ProxyPass %{ENV:proto}://vip-be/wwgw/var/ ),
but the doc states that isn't supported.
So, is there a better solution?
Thanks.
ST
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #13 from Mina Galić <me...@igalic.co> ---
I know this is an old issue, with a well known workaround.
But I'm still wondering if anyone is looking into fixing this on a mod_proxy
level.
Having applications with HTTP and WebSockets is pretty much the standard these
days, and none of them can benefit from mod_proxy's full featureset, thanks to
this design constraint, and this workaround.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #10 from Tabby <s....@gmail.com> ---
Sorry, but I'm a bit confused.
Since using the same URL for ws(s) and http(s) seems to be perfectly legal
(although I'd always go with distinct URL patterns), I'm not sure about what
you are suggesting to do.
At the moment, is there a valid alternative to this?
---
RewriteRule ^/ws/live/(.*) %{ENV:proto}://vip-be/wwgw/var/$1 [P,QSA,L]
<Proxy http://vip-be/wwgw/var>
ProxySet smax=0 ttl=15
</Proxy>
---
Furthermore: is it necessary, in your opinion, to add a <Proxy> block also for
ws, in order to keep its connection alive or is it worthless because of its
long-living nature?
Thanks
ST
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
Tabby <s....@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEEDINFO |NEW
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #7 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Yann Ylavic from comment #6)
> so that this proxy http worker can be reused.
I meant connections for this worker can be reused (kept alive)...
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #4 from Ruediger Pluem <rp...@apache.org> ---
(In reply to Tabby from comment #2)
> Hi Yann,
> not sure if this is a bug, anyway I don't know how to handle this case.
>
> Scenario:
> We have to serve both http and ws requests under the same URI, through an
> apache reverse proxy.
>
> I thought this would work:
> <Location /ws/live/>
> ### Settings for WebSocket
> ProxyPass ws://vip-be/wwgw/var/ disablereuse=on timeout=30
>
> ### Settings for HTTP
> ProxyPass http://vip-be/wwgw/var/ smax=0 ttl=15
> ProxyPassReverse http://vip-be/wwgw/var/
> </Location>
>
The configuration is wrong. You can only have one ProxyPass in a Location
block. If you really need to serve normal HTTP requests and Websockets from the
same URL you need to do some mod_rewrite magic looking for the Upgrade header.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #9 from Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Yann Ylavic from comment #8)
> Created attachment 33314 [details]
> mod_proxy_wstunnel fall through http
>
> Possibly a patch like this one could allow ProxyPass to either ws(s) or
> http(s) on the same URL, depending on the Upgrade header, but it is probably
> a hack :/
>
> We'd rather use the new Protocols negotiation to enable/decline
> mod_proxy_wstunnel for a request, if that's possible/compatible.
I vaguelly recall Jim trying something here for this requirement, but it was
not a 100% match -- but the thread died.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #16 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Yann Ylavic from comment #15)
>
> Using "ProxyWebsocketFallbackToProxyHttp on" would restore the old behaviour
> thus two ProxyPass needed (supposedly).
ProxyWebsocketFallbackToProxyHttp *off* would restore the old behaviour, the
default is "on" (websocket upgrade is fully handled by mod_proxy_http only).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #20 from Mina Galić <me...@igalic.co> ---
it works.
thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
--- Comment #1 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
Wrong description often leads to wrong decision ;)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #11 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Tabby from comment #10)
>
> At the moment, is there a valid alternative to this?
> ---
> RewriteRule ^/ws/live/(.*) %{ENV:proto}://vip-be/wwgw/var/$1 [P,QSA,L]
> <Proxy http://vip-be/wwgw/var>
> ProxySet smax=0 ttl=15
> </Proxy>
> ---
No currently there isn't an alternative, mod_proxy can't work either ws: or
http: on the same path.
The patch I proposed above may help though (not tested), maybe you could try it
(instead of the RewriteRules, it should work without).
>
> Furthermore: is it necessary, in your opinion, to add a <Proxy> block also
> for ws, in order to keep its connection alive or is it worthless because of
> its long-living nature?
Once the connection is upgraded to websocket, it can't (and must not) be
reused/kept-alive.
mod_proxy_wstunnel takes care of that already, whatever is set for disablereuse
(if the proxy worker is declared).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #22 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
I think it does work because the workaround sets the ws(s) scheme for
mod_proxy, which mod_proxy_http 2.4.47+ treats as/like "upgrade=websocket" (for
compatibility precisely).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #25 from Mina Galić <me...@igalic.co> ---
i think we can close this bug then.?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
--- Comment #17 from Mina Galić <me...@igalic.co> ---
if this has been possible since 2.4.47, why is the documentation still taking
about mod_rewrite?
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/mod_proxy_wstunnel.html
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
[Bug 58593] mod_proxy wrong decision between http and ws
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58593
Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
--- Comment #15 from Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> ---
Since 2.4.47 I think there is no need for two ProxyPass directives, a single:
ProxyPass /some/path/ https://backend/some/path/ upgrade=websocket ...
should proxy for both ws and http (up to the ws handshake) on that path.
Did someone tried this?
Using "ProxyWebsocketFallbackToProxyHttp on" would restore the old behaviour
thus two ProxyPass needed (supposedly).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org