listener: deprecate use_proxy_proto (2) #14445
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Taylor Barrella <tabarr@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Taylor Barrella <tabarr@google.com>
|
CC @envoyproxy/api-shepherds: Your approval is needed for changes made to |
|
Let's try merging main into the other PR. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
These are the same changes as #14406 which was already approved but seems to be having a CI issue
cc @lizan
Commit Message:
listener: deprecate use_proxy_proto
Signed-off-by: Taylor Barrella tabarr@google.com
Additional Description:
Risk Level: Low
Testing: grep for occurrences of use_proxy_proto
Docs Changes: Updated references to use_proxy_proto to refer to the listener filter instead, as well as sample configuration
Release Notes:
#14085
Deprecated: envoy_v3_api_field_config.listener.v3.FilterChain.use_proxy_proto was deprecated because the proxy protocol listener filter can/should be added at the listener level instead